1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

2: \documentclass[11pt]{sat}

3: \usepackage{amsmath,amsthm,amscd,amssymb}

4: \usepackage{latexsym}

5: 

6: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

7: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% INSERT YOUR MACROS HERE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

8: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

9: 

10: %%%%%%%%%%%%% fonts/sets %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

11: \newcommand{\R}{{\mathbb{R}}}

12: \newcommand{\Z}{{\mathbb{Z}}}

13: \newcommand{\C}{{\mathbb{C}}}

14: \newcommand{\D}{{\mathbb{D}}}

15: \newcommand{\h}{{\mathcal{H}}}

16: \newcommand{\pol}{{\mathcal{P}}}

17: \newcommand{\calH}{{\mathcal H}}

18: \newcommand{\calL}{{\mathcal L}}

19: \newcommand{\calM}{{\mathcal M}}

20: \newcommand{\calV}{{\mathcal V}}

21: 

22: 

23: \newcommand{\bbC}{{\mathbb{C}}}

24: \newcommand{\bbD}{{\mathbb{D}}}

25: \newcommand{\bbL}{{\mathbb{L}}}

26: \newcommand{\bbR}{{\mathbb{R}}}

27: \newcommand{\bbS}{{\mathbb{S}}}

28: \newcommand{\bbT}{{\mathbb{T}}}

29: \newcommand{\bbU}{{\mathbb{U}}}

30: \newcommand{\bbZ}{{\mathbb{Z}}}

31: 

32: \allowdisplaybreaks

33: \numberwithin{equation}{section}

34: 

35: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]

36: \newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}

37: \newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}

38: \newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}

39: \theoremstyle{definition}

40: %\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}

41: \newtheorem{example}[theorem]{Example}

42: \newtheorem{conjecture}[theorem]{Conjecture}

43: \newtheorem{xca}[theorem]{Exercise}

44: 

45: \theoremstyle{remark}

46: \newtheorem*{remark}{Remark}

47: \newtheorem*{remarks}{Remarks}

48: \newtheorem*{definition}{Definition}

49: 

50: % Absolute value notation

51: \newcommand{\abs}[1]{\lvert#1\rvert}

52: 

53: 

54: \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\lVert#1\rVert}

55: \newcommand{\snorm}[1]{{ \pmb\lvert}#1{ \pmb\rvert}}

56: 

57: \DeclareMathOperator{\Tr}{Tr}

58: \DeclareMathOperator{\diam}{diam}

59: \DeclareMathOperator{\Ima}{Im}

60: \DeclareMathOperator{\Span}{span}

61: \DeclareMathOperator{\Ran}{Ran}

62: \DeclareMathOperator{\lc}{linear\  combination\  of}

63: 

64: %\newcommand{\ang}[1]{\langle \langle#1\rangle \rangle}

65: \newcommand{\ang}[1]{\langle\! \langle#1\rangle\! \rangle}

66: \newcommand{\vect}[2]{\begin{pmatrix}#1 \\ #2 \end{pmatrix}}

67: 

68: \def\jap#1{\langle #1 \rangle}

69: 

70: \newcommand{\lb}{\label}

71: \newcommand{\bdone}{{\boldsymbol{1}}}

72: \newcommand{\bdzero}{{\boldsymbol{0}}}

73: \newcommand{\bddot}{{\boldsymbol{\cdot}}}

74: \newcommand{\singc}{\text{\rm{sc}}}

75: \newcommand{\supp}{\text{\rm{supp}}}

76: \newcommand{\ess}{\text{\rm{ess}}}

77: \newcommand{\s}{\text{\rm{s}}}

78: \newcommand{\ol}{\overline}

79: \newcommand{\f}{\frac}

80: \newcommand{\dott}{\,\cdot\,}

81: \newcommand{\cvh}{\text{\rm{cvh}}}

82: \newcommand{\tr}{\text{\rm{tr}}}

83: \newcommand{\dist}{\text{\rm{dist}}}

84: \newcommand{\ti}{\tilde  }

85: \newcommand{\wti}{\widetilde  }

86: 

87: \let\det=\undefined\DeclareMathOperator{\det}{det}

88: 

89: %%%%%%%%%%%%% marginal warnings %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

90: % ON:

91: \newcommand{\TK}{{\marginpar{x-ref?}}}

92: % OFF:

93: %\newcommand{\TK}{}

94: 

95: %  Rowan's unspaced list

96: %

97: \newcounter{smalllist}

98: \newenvironment{SL}{\begin{list}{{\rm\roman{smalllist})}}{%

99: \setlength{\topsep}{0mm}\setlength{\parsep}{0mm}\setlength{\itemsep}

100: {0mm}%

101: \setlength{\labelwidth}{2em}\setlength{\leftmargin}{2em}\usecounter

102: {smalllist}%

103: }}{\end{list}}

104: 

105: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

106: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% END OF YOUR MACROS  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

107: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

108: 

109: \sloppy

110: 

111: %\begin{document}

112: 

113: \title{The Analytic Theory of Matrix

114: Orthogonal Polynomials}

115: \def\shorttitle{Matrix Orthogonal Polynomials}

116: 

117: \author{David Damanik, Alexander Pushnitski, and Barry Simon}

118: \def\shortauthor{D.\ Damanik, A.\ Pushnitski, B.\ Simon }

119: 

120: 

121: \def\versiondate{January 30, 2008}

122: 

123: \def\abstracttext{We survey the analytic theory of matrix orthogonal polynomials.}

124: 

125: \def\MSCnumbers{42C05, 47B36, 30C10}

126: 

127: \def\keywords{orthogonal polynomials, matrix-valued measures, block

128: Jacobi matrices, block CMV matrices}

129: 

130: 

131: 

132: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

133: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% FOR EDITORS %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

134: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% DO NOT MODIFY THESE %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

135: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

136: 

137: %%%%%%%%%%%% Initializing (to be done by the editors)

138: \def\startpagenumber{1}

139: \def\volumenumber{4}

140: \def\year{2008}

141: 

142: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

143: 

144: \setcounter{page}{\startpagenumber}

145: \pagestyle{myheadings}

146: \newcommand{\beginddoc}{\begin{document}

147: \maketitle

148: \begin{abstract}

149: \abstracttext

150: \vskip1pt MSC: \MSCnumbers

151: \ifx\keywords\empty\else\vskip1pt keywords: \keywords\fi

152: \end{abstract}

153: \insert\footins{\scriptsize

154: \medskip

155: \baselineskip 8pt

156: \leftline{Surveys in Approximation Theory}

157: \leftline{Volume \volumenumber, \year.

158: pp.~\thepage--\pageref{endpage}.}

159: \leftline{\copyright\ \year\ Surveys in Approximation Theory.}

160: \leftline{ISSN 1555-578X}

161: \leftline{All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.}

162: \smallskip

163: \par\allowbreak}

164: \tableofcontents}

165: \renewcommand\rightmark{\ifodd\thepage{\it \hfill\shorttitle\hfill}\else {\it \hfill\shortauthor\hfill}\fi}

166: \markboth{{\it \shortauthor}}{{\it \shorttitle}}

167: \markright{{\it \shorttitle}}

168: \def\endddoc{\label{endpage}\end{document}}

169: \date{{\small \versiondate}}

170: \setlength\oddsidemargin{0pc}

171: \setlength\evensidemargin{0pc}

172: \setlength\topmargin{0in}

173: \setlength\textwidth{6.5in}

174: \setlength\textheight{8.6in}

175: \beginddoc

176: 

177: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

178: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% YOUR MATHEMATICS  %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

179: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

180: 

181: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

182: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%% INSERT YOUR ARTICLE HERE USING %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

183: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% STANDARD LATEX COMMANDS %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

184: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

185: 

186: %\maketitle

187: 

188: %\tableofcontents

189: 

190: \section{Introduction}

191: 

192: \subsection{Introduction and Overview} \lb{s1.1}

193: 

194: Orthogonal polynomials on the real line (OPRL) were developed in

195: the nineteenth century and orthogonal polynomials on the unit

196: circle (OPUC) were initially developed around 1920 by Szeg\H{o}.

197: Their matrix analogues are of much more recent vintage. They were

198: originally developed in the MOPUC case indirectly in the study of

199: prediction theory \cite{HL1,HL2, Kol,Krein1,Krein2,Lev,Wie} in the

200: period 1940--1960. The connection to OPUC in the scalar case was

201: discovered by Krein \cite{Krein1}. Much of the theory since is in

202: the electrical engineering literature \cite

203: {DG92,DGK,DGK3,DGK79,DGK2,DGK81,Kai74,Kai87,K6.1,KVM,YK}; see also

204: \cite{Ger81,Ge92,GC,GW07,MarRod}.

205: 

206: The corresponding real line theory (MOPRL) is still more recent:

207: Following early work of Krein \cite{Krein3} and Berezan'ski

208: \cite{Ber} on block Jacobi matrices, mainly as applied to

209: self-adjoint extensions, there was a seminal paper of

210: Aptekarev--Nikishin \cite{AN} and a flurry of papers since the

211: 1990s \cite{Berg,Berg-Duran1,Berg-Duran2,CFMV,CMV05,CMV07,CG05,CG,CG07,CH,CGR,DGIM,DS,Dur1,Dur95,

212: Dur96,Dur6,Dur99,Dur7,Dur8,DuDa,DD,DDe,DG04,DG05a,DG05b,DG05c,DG05d,DG06,DG07a,DG07b,DdI07a,

213: DdI07b,DL,DL97a,DL97b, DL00,DL04,DL07,DLS,DP02,DP,DVA,Dyu,Fu,Ger82,Gru,Gru07,

214: GI07a,GI07b,GI03,GPT01,GPT02a,GPT02,GPT03,GPT04,GPT05,GT07,LR,Lop,Lop01,

215: MS,MY,MZ,M05a,M05b,M05c,PT04,PT07a,PT07b,PR,RT,Ros,SVI,Tirao,

216: Yak,YM02,YMP01,YMP02,Zyg}; see also \cite{BB83}.

217: 

218: There is very little on the subject in monographs

219: --- the more classical ones (e.g.,

220: \cite{Chi,FrB,Ger77,Szb}) predate most of the subject; see,

221: however, Atkinson \cite[Section~6.6]{Atk}. Ismail \cite {IsmBk} has no

222: discussion and Simon \cite{S,S2} has a single section! Because of

223: the use of MOPRL in \cite{DKSppt}, we became interested in the

224: subject and, in particular, we needed some basic results for that

225: paper which we couldn't find in the literature or which, at least,

226: weren't very accessible. Thus, we decided to produce this

227: comprehensive review that we hope others will find useful.

228: 

229: As with the scalar case, the subject breaks into two parts,

230: conveniently called the analytic theory (general structure

231: results) and the algebraic theory (the set of non-trivial

232: examples). This survey deals entirely with the analytic theory. We

233: note, however, that one of the striking developments in recent

234: years has been the discovery that there are rich classes of

235: genuinely new MOPRL, even at the classical level of Bochner's

236: theorem; see \cite{CG,DG04,DuLo4,DuLo5,Gru,GPT02,GPT03,GPT04,GPT05,GT07,PT07a,RT}

237: and the forthcoming monograph \cite{DGPT} for further

238: discussion of this algebraic side.

239: 

240: In this introduction, we will focus mainly on the MOPRL case. For

241: scalar OPRL, a key issue

242: is the passage from measure to monic OPRL, then to normalized OPRL,

243: and finally to

244: Jacobi parameters. There are no choices in going from measure to

245: monic OP, $P_n(x)$.

246: They are determined by

247: \begin{equation} \lb{1.1}

248: P_n(x) = x^n + \text{lower order}, \qquad \jap{x^j, P_n}=0 \quad j=1,

249: \dots, n-1.

250: \end{equation}

251: 

252: However, the basic condition on the orthonormal polynomials, namely,

253: \begin{equation} \lb{1.2}

254: \jap{p_n,p_m} =\delta_{nm}

255: \end{equation}

256: does not uniquely determine the $p_n(x)$. The standard choice is

257: $$

258: p_n(x) =  \f{P_n(x)}{\norm{P_n}}.

259: $$

260: However, if

261: $\theta_0, \theta_1, \dots$ are arbitrary real numbers,

262: then

263: \begin{equation} \lb{1.3}

264: \ti p_n(x) =  \f{e^{i\theta_n} P_n(x)}{\norm{P_n}}

265: \end{equation}

266: also obey \eqref{1.2}. If the recursion coefficients (aka Jacobi

267: parameters), are defined via

268: \begin{equation} \lb{1.4}

269: xp_n =a_{n+1} p_{n+1} + b_{n+1} p_n + a_n p_{n-1},

270: \end{equation}

271: then the choice \eqref{1.3} leads to

272: \begin{equation} \lb{1.5}

273: \ti b_n =b_n, \qquad \ti a_n =e^{i\theta_n} a_n e^{-i\theta_{n-1}}.

274: \end{equation}

275: 

276: The standard choice is, of course, most natural here; for example, if

277: \begin{equation} \lb{1.6}

278: p_n(x) = \kappa_n x^n + \text{lower order},

279: \end{equation}

280: then $a_n>0$ implies $\kappa_n >0$. It would be crazy to make any

281: other choice.

282: 

283: For MOPRL, these choices are less clear. As we will explain in

284: Section~\ref{s1.2}, there are

285: now two matrix-valued ``inner products" formally written as

286: \begin{align}

287: \ang{f,g}_R &= \int f(x)^\dagger\, d\mu(x) g(x), \lb{1.7} \\

288: \ang{f,g}_L &= \int g(x)\, d\mu(x) f (x)^\dagger, \lb{1.8}

289: \end{align}

290: where now $\mu$ is a matrix-valued measure and  ${}^\dagger$

291: denotes the adjoint, and corresponding two sets of monic OPRL:

292: $P_n^R(x)$ and $P_n^L(x)$. The orthonormal polynomials are

293: required to obey

294: \begin{equation} \lb{1.9}

295: \ang{p_n^R,p_m^R}_R = \delta_{nm}\bdone.

296: \end{equation}

297: The analogue of \eqref{1.3} is

298: \begin{equation} \lb{1.10z}

299: \ti p_n^R(x) = P_n^R(x) \ang{P_n^R,P_n^R}^{-1/2} \sigma_n

300: \end{equation}

301: for a unitary $\sigma_n$. For the immediately following, use $p_n^R$

302: to be

303: the choice $\sigma_n\equiv 1$. For any such choice, we have a

304: recursion relation,

305: \begin{equation} \lb{1.10x}

306: xp_n^R(x) =p_{n+1}^R(x) A_{n+1}^\dagger + p_n^R(x) B_{n+1} + p_{n-1}^R

307: (x) A_n

308: \end{equation}

309: with the analogue of \eqref{1.5} (comparing $\sigma_n\equiv

310: \bdone$ to general $\sigma_n$)

311: \begin{equation} \lb{1.10}

312: \ti B_n =\sigma_n^\dagger B_n \sigma_n \qquad \ti A_n =\sigma_{n-1}^

313: \dagger A_n\sigma_n.

314: \end{equation}

315: 

316: 

317: The obvious analogue of the scalar case is to pick $\sigma_n\equiv

318: \bdone$, which makes $\kappa_n$ in

319: \begin{equation} \lb{1.11x}

320: p_n^R(x) = \kappa_n x^n + \text{lower order}

321: \end{equation}

322: obey $\kappa_n >0$. Note that \eqref{1.10x} implies

323: \begin{equation} \lb{1.11}

324: \kappa_n = \kappa_{n+1} A_{n+1}^\dagger

325: \end{equation}

326: or, inductively,

327: \begin{equation} \lb{1.13}

328: \kappa_n = (A_n^\dagger \dots A_1^\dagger)^{-1}.

329: \end{equation}

330: In general, this choice does not lead to $A_n$ positive or even

331: Hermitian. Alternatively, one can pick $\sigma_n$ so $\ti A_n$ is

332: positive. Besides these two ``obvious" choices, $\kappa_n > 0$ or

333: $A_n >0$, there is a third that $A_n$ be lower triangular that, as

334: we will see in Section~\ref{s1.4}, is natural. Thus, in the study

335: of MOPRL one needs to talk about equivalent sets of $p_n^R$ and of

336: Jacobi parameters, and this is a major theme of Chapter~\ref{s2}.

337: Interestingly enough for MOPUC, the commonly picked choice

338: equivalent to $A_n>0$ (namely, $\rho_n >0$) seems to suffice for

339: applications. So we do not discuss equivalence classes for MOPUC.

340: 

341: Associated to a set of matrix Jacobi parameters is a block Jacobi

342: matrix, that is, a matrix which

343: when written in $l\times l$ blocks is tridiagonal; see \eqref{b6.1}

344: below.

345: 

346: In Chapter~\ref{s2}, we discuss the basics of MOPRL while Chapter~\ref

347: {s3} discusses MOPUC.

348: Chapter~\ref{s4} discusses the Szeg\H{o} mapping connection of MOPUC

349: and MOPRL. Finally,

350: Chapter~\ref{s5} discusses the extension of the theory of regular OPs

351: \cite{StT} to MOPRL.

352: 

353: While this is mainly a survey, it does have numerous new results, of

354: which we mention:

355: \begin{SL}

356: \item[(a)] The clarification of equivalent Jacobi parameters and

357: several new theorems (Theorems~\ref{l.b4} and \ref{l.b5}).

358: \item[(b)] A new result (Theorem~\ref{T2.18H}) on the order of

359: poles or zeros of $m(z)$ in terms of eigenvalues of $J$ and the

360: once stripped $J^{(1)}$. \item[(c)] Formulas for the resolvent in

361: the MOPRL (Theorem~\ref {T2.27}) and MOPUC (Theorem~\ref{T3.21})

362: cases. \item[(d)] A theorem on zeros of $\det(\Phi_n^R)$

363: (Theorem~\ref{T3.6A}) and eigenvalues of a cutoff CMV matrix

364: (Theorem~\ref{T3.6D}). \item[(e)] A new proof of the Geronimus

365: relations (Theorem~\ref{T4.2}). \item[(f)] Discussion of regular

366: MOPRL (Chapter~\ref{s5}).

367: \end{SL}

368: 

369: \smallskip

370: There are numerous open questions and conjectures in this paper, of

371: which we mention:

372: \begin{SL}

373: \item[(1)] We prove that type~1 and type~3 Jacobi parameters in

374: the Nevai class have $A_n\to\bdone$ but do not know if this is

375: true for type~2 and, if so, how to prove it.

376: 

377: \item[(2)] Determine which monic matrix polynomials, $\Phi$, can

378: occur as monic MOPUC.

379: We know $\det(\Phi(z))$ must have all of its zeros in the unit

380: disk in $\C$, but unlike the scalar

381: case where this is sufficient, we do not know necessary and

382: sufficient conditions.

383: 

384: \item[(3)] Generalize Khrushchev theory

385: \cite{Kh2000,Khr,KhGo} to MOPUC; see Section~\ref{s3.13}.

386: 

387: \item[(4)] Provide a proof of Geronimus relations for MOPUC that

388: uses the theory of canonical moments \cite{DS}; see the discussion

389: at the start of Chapter~\ref{s4}.

390: 

391: \item[(5)] Prove Conjecture~\ref{Con5.7} extending a result of

392: Stahl--Totik \cite{StT} from OPRL to MOPRL.

393: \end{SL}

394: 

395: 

396: \subsection{Matrix-Valued Measures} \lb{s1.2}

397: 

398: Let $\calM_l$ denote the ring of all $l\times l$ complex-valued

399: matrices; we denote by

400: $\alpha^\dagger$ the Hermitian conjugate of $\alpha\in \calM_l$.

401: (Because of the use of

402: $\,^*\,$ for Szeg\H{o} dual in the theory of OPUC, we do not use it

403: for adjoint.)

404: For $\alpha\in\calM_l$, we denote by $\norm{\alpha}$ its Euclidean

405: norm  (i.e., the norm of $\alpha$ as a linear operator on $\C^l$ with the

406: usual Euclidean norm).

407: Consider the

408: set $\pol$ of all polynomials in $z\in\C$ with coefficients from $

409: \calM_l$. The set $\pol$

410: can be considered either as a right or as a left module over $\calM_l

411: $; clearly, conjugation

412: makes the left and right structures isomorphic. For $n=0,1,\dots$, $

413: \pol_n$ will denote those

414: polynomials in $\pol$ of degree at most $n$. The set $\mathcal{V}$

415: denotes the set of all

416: polynomials in $z \in \C$ with coefficients from $\C^l$. The standard

417: inner product in

418: $\C^l$ is denoted by $\langle\cdot, \cdot\rangle_{\C^l}$.

419: 

420: A matrix-valued measure, $\mu$, on $\R$ (or $\C$) is the

421: assignment of a positive semi-definite $l\times l$ matrix $\mu(X)$

422: to every Borel set $X$ which is countably additive. We will

423: usually normalize it by requiring

424: \begin{equation} \lb{1.20}

425: \mu(\R)=\bdone

426: \end{equation}

427: (or $\mu(\C)=\bdone$) where $\bdone$ is the $l\times l$ identity

428: matrix. (We use $\bdone$ in general for an identity operator,

429: whether in $\calM_l$ or in the operators on some other Hilbert

430: space, and $\bdzero$ for the zero operator or matrix.) Normally,

431: our measures for MOPRL will have compact support and, of course,

432: our measures for MOPUC will be supported on all or part of

433: $\partial\D$ ($\D$ is the unit disk in $\C$).

434: 

435: Associated to any such measures is a scalar measure

436: \begin{equation} \lb{1.21}

437: \mu_\tr(X) =\Tr(\mu(X))

438: \end{equation}

439: (the trace normalized by $\Tr(\bdone)=l$). $\mu_\tr$ is normalized

440: by $\mu_\tr(\R)=l$.

441: 

442: Applying the Radon--Nikodym theorem to the matrix elements of $\mu$,

443: we see there is a

444: positive semi-definite matrix function $M_{ij}(x)$ so

445: \begin{equation} \lb{1.22}

446: d\mu_{ij}(x)=M_{ij}(x)\, d\mu_\tr (x).

447: \end{equation}

448: Clearly, by \eqref{1.21},

449: \begin{equation} \lb{1.23}

450: \Tr(M(x)) =1

451: \end{equation}

452: for $d\mu_\tr$-a.e.\ $x$. Conversely, any scalar measure with

453: $\mu_\tr (\R)=l$ and positive semi-definite matrix-valued function

454: $M$ obeying \eqref{1.23} define a matrix-valued measure normalized

455: by \eqref{1.20}.

456: 

457: Given $l\times l$ matrix-valued functions $f,g$, we define the $l

458: \times l$ matrix $\ang{f,g}_R$ by

459: \begin{equation} \lb{1.24}

460: \ang{f,g}_R=\int f(x)^\dagger M(x)g(x)\, d\mu_\tr (x),

461: \end{equation}

462: that is, its $(j,k)$ entry is

463: \begin{equation} \lb{1.25}

464: \sum_{nm} \int \ol{f_{nj}(x)}\, M_{nm}(x) g_{mk}(x)\, d\mu_\tr(x).

465: \end{equation}

466: Since $f^\dagger Mf\geq 0$, we see that

467: \begin{equation} \lb{1.25a}

468: \ang{f,f}_R \geq 0.

469: \end{equation}

470: One might be tempted to think of $\ang{f,f}_R^{1/2}$ as some kind of

471: norm, but that is

472: doubtful. Even if $\mu$ is supported at a single point, $x_0$, with

473: $M=l^{-1}\bdone$, this

474: ``norm'' is essentially the absolute value of $A=f(x_0)$, which is

475: known not to obey the

476: triangle inequality! (See \cite[Sect.~I.1]{S-TI} for an example.)

477: 

478: However, if one looks at

479: \begin{equation} \lb{1.26}

480: \norm{f}_R=(\Tr\ang{f,f}_R)^{1/2},

481: \end{equation}

482: one does have a norm (or, at least, a semi-norm). Indeed,

483: \begin{equation} \lb{1.27}

484: \langle f,g\rangle_R=\Tr\ang{f,g}_R

485: \end{equation}

486: is a sesquilinear form which is positive semi-definite, so

487: \eqref{1.26} is the semi-norm corresponding to an inner product

488: and, of course, one has a Cauchy--Schwarz inequality

489: \begin{equation} \lb{1.28}

490: \abs{\Tr\ang{f,g}_R}\leq \norm{f}_R \norm{g}_R.

491: \end{equation}

492: 

493: We have not specified which $f$'s and $g$'s can be used in \eqref

494: {1.24}. We have in mind

495: mainly polynomials in $x$ in the real case and Laurent polynomials in

496: $z$ in the $\partial\bbD$

497: case although, obviously, continuous functions are okay. Indeed, it

498: suffices that $f$ (and $g$) be measurable and

499: obey

500: \begin{equation} \lb{1.28a}

501: \int \Tr(f^\dagger (x) f(x))\, d\mu_\tr (x) <\infty

502: \end{equation}

503: for the integrals in \eqref{1.25} to converge. The set of

504: equivalence classes under $f\sim g$ if $\norm{f-g}_R = 0$ defines

505: a Hilbert space, $\calH$, and $\langle f,g\rangle_R$ is

506: the inner product on this space.

507: 

508: Instead of \eqref{1.24}, we use the suggestive shorthand

509: \begin{equation} \lb{1.29}

510: \ang{f,g}_R = \int f(x)^\dagger \, d\mu(x) g(x).

511: \end{equation}

512: The use of $R$ here comes from ``right'' for if $\alpha\in\calM_l$,

513: \begin{align}

514: \ang{f,g\alpha}_R &= \ang{f,g}_R \alpha, \lb{1.30} \\

515: \ang{f\alpha,g}_R &= \alpha^\dagger\ang{f,g}_R, \lb{1.31}

516: \end{align}

517: but, in general, $\ang{f,\alpha g}_R$ is not related to $\ang{f,g}_R$.

518: 

519: While $(\Tr\ang{f,f}_R)^{1/2}$ is a natural analogue of the norm

520: in the scalar case, it will sometimes be useful to instead

521: consider

522: \begin{equation} \lb{1.31a}

523: [\det \ang{f,f}_R]^{1/2}.

524: \end{equation}

525: Indeed, this is a stronger ``norm'' in that $\det >0\Rightarrow

526: \Tr>0$ but not vice-versa.

527: 

528: When $d\mu$ is a ``direct sum,'' that is, each $M(x)$ is diagonal,

529: one can appreciate the difference.

530: In that case, $d\mu=d\mu_1\oplus\cdots\oplus d\mu_l$ and the MOPRL

531: are direct sums (i.e., diagonal

532: matrices) of scalar OPRL

533: \begin{equation} \lb{1.31b}

534: P_n^R (x,d\mu) =P_n(x,d\mu_1) \oplus\cdots\oplus P_n(x,d\mu_l).

535: \end{equation}

536: Then

537: \begin{equation} \lb{1.31c}

538: \norm{P_n^R}_R =\biggl(\, \sum_{j=1}^l \norm{P_n(\cdot, d\mu_j)}_{L^2

539: (d\mu_j)}^2\biggr)^{1/2},

540: \end{equation}

541: while

542: \begin{equation} \lb{1.31d}

543: (\det \ang{P_n^R,P_n^R}_R)^{1/2} = \prod_{j=1}^l \norm{P_n (\cdot, d

544: \mu_j)}_{L^2(d\mu_j)}.

545: \end{equation}

546: In particular, in terms of extending the theory of regular

547: measures \cite{StT}, $\norm{P_n^R}^{1/n}_R$ is only sensitive to

548: $\max\norm{P_n (\cdot, d\mu_j)}_{L^2(d\mu_j)}^{1/2} $ while

549: $(\det\ang{P_n^R,P_n^R}_R)^{1/2}$ is sensitive to them all. Thus,

550: $\det$ will be needed for that theory (see Chapter~\ref{s5}).

551: 

552: There will also be a left inner product and, correspondingly, two

553: sets of MOPRL and MOPUC. We discuss

554: this further in Sections~\ref{s2.1} and \ref{s3.1}.

555: 

556: Occasionally, for $\bbC^l$ vector-valued functions $f$ and $g$, we

557: will want to consider the scalar

558: \begin{equation} \lb{1.32}

559: \sum_{k,j}\int \ol{f_k(x)}\, M_{kj}(x) g_j (x)\, d\mu_\tr(x),

560: \end{equation}

561: which we will denote

562: \begin{equation} \lb{1.33}

563: \int d \langle f(x),\mu(x) g(x)\rangle_{\C^l}.

564: \end{equation}

565: 

566: 

567: We next turn to module Fourier expansions. A set $\{\varphi_j\}_{j=1}

568: ^N$ in $\calH$ ($N$ may be infinite)

569: is called orthonormal if and only if

570: \begin{equation} \lb{1.33a}

571: \ang{\varphi_j,\varphi_k}_R =\delta_{jk}\bdone.

572: \end{equation}

573: This natural terminology is an abuse of notation since

574: \eqref{1.33a} implies orthogonality in $\langle\cdot,\cdot

575: \rangle_R$ but not normalization, and is much stronger than orthogonality in

576: $\langle \cdot,\cdot\rangle_R$.

577: 

578: Suppose for a moment that $N<\infty$. For any $a_1, \dots, a_N\in

579: \calM_l$, we can form $\sum_{j=1}^N

580: \varphi_j a_j$ and, by the right multiplication relations \eqref

581: {1.30}, \eqref{1.31}, and \eqref{1.33a},

582: we have

583: \begin{equation} \lb{1.33b}

584: \biggl< \!\!\!\biggl< \sum_{j=1}^N \varphi_j a_j, \sum_{j=1}^N

585: \varphi_j b_j \biggr>\!\! \!\biggr>_R =

586: \sum_{j=1}^N a_j^\dagger b_j.

587: \end{equation}

588: We will denote the set of all such $\sum_{j=1}^N \varphi_j a_j$ by $

589: \calH_{(\varphi_j)}$---it is a

590: vector subspace of $\calH$ of dimension (over $\bbC$) $Nl^2$.

591: 

592: Define for $f\in\calH$,

593: \begin{equation} \lb{1.33c}

594: \pi_{(\varphi_j)} (f)=\sum_{j=1}^N \varphi_j \ang{\varphi_j,f}_R.

595: \end{equation}

596: It is easy to see it is the orthogonal projection in the scalar

597: inner product $\langle \cdot,\cdot\rangle_R$ from $\calH$ to $\calH_{(\varphi_j)}$.

598: 

599: By the standard Hilbert space calculation, taking care to only

600: multiply on the right, one finds the

601: Pythagorean theorem,

602: \begin{equation} \lb{1.33d}

603: \ang{f,f}_R = \ang{f-\pi_{(\varphi_j)} f, f-\pi_{(\varphi_j)}f}_R +

604: \sum_{j=1}^N

605: \ang{\varphi_j,f}_R^\dagger \ang{\varphi_j,f}_R.

606: \end{equation}

607: 

608: As usual, this proves for infinite $N$ that

609: \begin{equation} \lb{1.33e}

610: \sum_{j=1}^N \ang{\varphi_j,f}_R^\dagger \ang{\varphi_j,f}_R \leq \ang

611: {f,f}_R

612: \end{equation}

613: and the convergence of

614: \begin{equation} \lb{1.33f}

615: \sum_{j=1}^N \varphi_j \ang{\varphi_j,f}_R \equiv \pi_{(\varphi_j)}(f)

616: \end{equation}

617: allowing the definition of $\pi_{(\varphi_j)}$ and of $\calH_

618: {(\varphi_j)}\equiv\Ran \pi_{(\varphi_j)}$

619: for $N=\infty$.

620: 

621: An orthonormal set is called complete if

622: $\calH_{(\varphi_j)}=\calH$. In that case, equality holds in

623: \eqref{1.33e} and $\pi_{(\varphi_j)}(f)=f$.

624: 

625: For orthonormal bases, we have the Parseval relation from

626: \eqref{1.33d}

627: \begin{equation} \lb{1.33g}

628: \ang{f,f}_R =\sum_{j=1}^\infty \ang{\varphi_j,f}_R^\dagger \ang

629: {\varphi_j,f}_R

630: \end{equation}

631: and

632: \begin{equation}\lb{1.33h}

633: \norm{f}_R^2 =\sum_{j=1}^\infty \Tr(\ang{\varphi_j,f}_R^\dagger

634: \ang {\varphi_j,f}_R).

635: \end{equation}

636: 

637: \subsection{Matrix M\"obius Transformations} \lb{s1.3}

638: 

639: Without an understanding of matrix M\"obius transformations, the

640: form of the MOPUC Geronimus theorem we will prove in

641: Section~\ref{s3.5} will seem strange-looking. To set the stage,

642: recall that scalar fractional linear transformations (FLT) are

643: associated to matrices $T=\left( \begin{smallmatrix} a&b \\ c&d

644: \end{smallmatrix}\right)$ with $\det T \not= 0$ via

645: \begin{equation} \lb{1.20x}

646: f_T(z) = \f{az+b}{cz+d}\, .

647: \end{equation}

648: Without loss, one can restrict to

649: \begin{equation} \lb{1.21x}

650: \det(T)=1.

651: \end{equation}

652: Indeed, $T\mapsto f_T$ is a $2$ to $1$ map of $\bbS\bbL(2,\bbC)$ to

653: maps of $\bbC\cup\{\infty\}$ to itself.

654: One advantage of the matrix formalism is that the map is a matrix

655: homomorphism, that is,

656: \begin{equation} \lb{1.22x}

657: f_{T\circ S} = f_T \circ f_S,

658: \end{equation}

659: which shows that the group of FLTs is $\bbS\bbL(2,\bbC)/\{\bdone, -

660: \bdone\}$.

661: 

662: While \eqref{1.22x} can be checked by direct calculation, a more

663: instructive way is to look at the

664: complex projective line. $u,v\in\bbC^2\setminus\{0\}$ are called

665: equivalent if there is $\lambda\in

666: \bbC\setminus\{0\}$ so that $u=\lambda v$. Let $[\cdot]$ denote

667: equivalence classes. Except for

668: $[\binom{1}{0}]$, every equivalence class contains exactly one point

669: of the form $\binom{z}{1}$ with

670: $z\in\bbC$. If $[\binom{1}{0}]$ is associated with $\infty$, the set

671: of equivalence classes is naturally

672: associated with $\bbC\cup\{\infty\}$. $f_T$ then obeys

673: \begin{equation} \lb{1.23x}

674: \biggl[ T\binom{z}{1}\biggr] = \biggl[ \binom{f_T(z)}{1}\biggr]

675: \end{equation}

676: from which \eqref{1.22x} is immediate.

677: 

678: By M\"obius transformations we will mean those FLTs that map

679: $\bbD$ onto itself. Let

680: \begin{equation} \lb{1.24x}

681: J=\left( \begin{array}{rr}

682: 1 & 0 \\

683: 0 & -1

684: \end{array} \right).

685: \end{equation}

686: Then $[u]=[\binom{z}{1}]$ with $\abs{z}=1$ (resp.\ $\abs{z}<1$) if

687: and only if $\jap{u,Ju}=0$

688: (resp.\ $\jap{u,Ju}<0$). From this, it is not hard to show that if $

689: \det(T)=1$, then $f_T$ maps

690: $\bbD$ invertibly onto $\bbD$ if and only if

691: \begin{equation} \lb{1.25x}

692: T^\dagger \! JT=J.

693: \end{equation}

694: If $T$ has the form $\left(\begin{smallmatrix} a&b \\ c&d \end

695: {smallmatrix}\right)$, this is equivalent to

696: \begin{equation} \lb{1.26x}

697: \abs{a}^2 - \abs{c}^2 =1, \qquad \abs{b}^2-\abs{d}^2 =-1, \qquad \bar

698: ab-\bar cd =0.

699: \end{equation}

700: The set of $T$'s obeying $\det(T)=1$ and \eqref{1.25x} is called $\bbS

701: \bbU(1,1)$. It is

702: studied extensively in \cite[Sect.~10.4]{S2}.

703: 

704: The self-adjoint elements of $\bbS\bbU(1,1)$ are parametrized by $

705: \alpha\in\bbD$ via $\rho =

706: (1-\abs{\alpha}^2)^{1/2}$,

707: \begin{equation} \lb{1.27x}

708: T_\alpha = \f{1}{\rho}\begin{pmatrix}

709: 1 & \alpha \\

710: \bar\alpha & 1 \end{pmatrix}

711: \end{equation}

712: associated to

713: \begin{equation} \lb{1.28x}

714: f_{T_\alpha}(z) = \f{z+\alpha}{1+\bar\alpha z}\, .

715: \end{equation}

716: Notice that

717: \begin{equation} \lb{1.29x}

718: T_\alpha^{-1} = T_{-\alpha}

719: \end{equation}

720: and that

721: \[

722: \forall z\in\bbD,\, \exists \, ! \, \alpha \text{ such that } T_

723: \alpha (0)=z,

724: \]

725: namely, $\alpha =z$.

726: 

727: It is a basic theorem that every holomorphic bijection of $\bbD$ to $

728: \bbD$ is an $f_T$ for some

729: $T$ in $\bbS\bbU(1,1)$ (unique up to $\pm\bdone$).

730: 

731: With this in place, we can turn to the matrix case. Let $\calM_l$ be

732: the space of $l\times l$

733: complex matrices with the Euclidean norm induced by the vector norm

734: $\jap{\cdot, \cdot}_{\bbC^l}^{1/2}$. Let

735: \begin{equation} \lb{1.30x}

736: \bbD_l =\{A\in\calM_l\, \colon \norm{A} <1\}.

737: \end{equation}

738: We are interested in holomorphic bijections of $\bbD_l$ to itself,

739: especially via a suitable notion of

740: FLT. There is a huge (and diffuse) literature on the subject,

741: starting with its use in analytic number

742: theory. It has also been studied in connection with electrical

743: engineering filters and indefinite

744: matrix Hilbert spaces. Among the huge literature, we mention \cite

745: {ALK,Alp,Dym,GK,Helg,ScZ}. Especially

746: relevant to MOPUC is the book of Bakonyi--Constantinescu \cite{BakCon}.

747: 

748: Consider $\calM_l \oplus \calM_l = \calM_l [2]$ as a right module

749: over $\calM_l$. The $\calM_l$-projective line is defined by saying

750: $\left[\begin{smallmatrix} X \\ Y

751: \end{smallmatrix}\right]\sim \left[\begin{smallmatrix} X' \\

752: Y'\end{smallmatrix}\right]$, both in $\calM_l[2]

753: \setminus\{\bdzero\}$, if and only if there exists

754: $\Lambda\in\calM_l$, $\Lambda$ invertible so that

755: \begin{equation} \lb{1.31x}

756: X= X'\Lambda, \qquad Y=Y'\Lambda.

757: \end{equation}

758: Let $T$ be a map of $\calM_l[2]$ of the form

759: \begin{equation} \lb{1.32x}

760: T=\begin{pmatrix} A&B \\ C&D

761: \end{pmatrix}

762: \end{equation}

763: acting on $\calM_l[2]$ by

764: \begin{equation} \lb{1.33x}

765: T\begin{bmatrix} X \\ Y \end{bmatrix} =

766: \begin{bmatrix} AX + BY \\ CX + DY \end{bmatrix}.

767: \end{equation}

768: Because this acts on the left and $\Lambda$ equivalence on the right,

769: $T$ maps equivalence classes

770: to themselves. In particular, if $CX+D$ is invertible, $T$ maps the

771: equivalence class of

772: $\left[\begin{smallmatrix}X \\ \bdone

773: \end{smallmatrix}\right]$ to the equivalence class of

774: $\left[\begin{smallmatrix}f_T[X] \\ \bdone \end{smallmatrix}\right]$,

775: where

776: \begin{equation} \lb{1.34}

777: f_T[X]=(AX+B)(CX+D)^{-1}.

778: \end{equation}

779: 

780: So long as $CX+D$ remains invertible, \eqref{1.22x} remains true. Let

781: $J$ be the $2l\times 2l$ matrix

782: in $l\times l$ block form

783: \begin{equation} \lb{1.35}

784: J = \left( \begin{array}{rr}

785: \bdone  & \bdzero \\ \bdzero & -\bdone

786: \end{array} \right).

787: \end{equation}

788: Note that (with $\left[\begin{smallmatrix} X \\ \bdone \end

789: {smallmatrix}\right]^\dagger = [X^\dagger \bdone]$)

790: \begin{equation} \lb{1.36}

791: \begin{bmatrix} X \\ \bdone \end{bmatrix}^\dagger J \begin{bmatrix} X

792: \\ \bdone \end{bmatrix} \leq

793: \bdzero \Leftrightarrow X^\dagger X\leq \bdone \Leftrightarrow \norm{X}

794: \leq \bdone.

795: \end{equation}

796: Therefore, if we define $\bbS\bbU(l,l)$ to be those $T$'s with

797: $\det T=1$ and

798: \begin{equation} \lb{1.37}

799: T^\dagger \! JT =J,

800: \end{equation}

801: then

802: \begin{equation} \lb{1.38}

803: T\in\bbS\bbU(l,l) \Rightarrow f_T [\bbD_l]=\bbD_l \text{ as a

804: bijection}.

805: \end{equation}

806: If $T$ has the form \eqref{1.32x}, then \eqref{1.37} is equivalent to

807: \begin{align}

808: & A^\dagger A - C^\dagger C = D^\dagger D - B^\dagger B =\bdone, \lb

809: {1.61a} \\

810: & A^\dagger B = C^\dagger D \lb{1.61b}

811: \end{align}

812: (the fourth relation $B^\dagger A = D^\dagger C$ is equivalent to

813: \eqref{1.61b}).

814: 

815: This depends on

816: 

817: \begin{proposition}\lb{P1.3.1} If $T=\left(\begin{smallmatrix} A&B \\

818: C&D\end{smallmatrix}\right)$ obeys \eqref{1.37} and $\norm{X} <1$,

819: then $CX+D$ is invertible.

820: \end{proposition}

821: 

822: \begin{proof} \eqref{1.37} implies that

823: \begin{align}

824: T^{-1} &= JT^\dagger \! J \lb{1.37a} \\

825: &= \left( \begin{array}{rr}

826: A^\dagger & -C^\dagger \\

827: -B^\dagger & D^\dagger

828: \end{array} \right). \lb{1.37b}

829: \end{align}

830: Clearly, \eqref{1.37} also implies $T^{-1}\in\bbS\bbU(l,l)$. Thus,

831: by \eqref{1.61a} for $T^{-1}$,

832: \begin{equation} \lb{1.37c}

833: DD^\dagger -CC^\dagger =\bdone.

834: \end{equation}

835: This implies first that $DD^\dagger\geq \bdone$, so $D$ is

836: invertible, and second that

837: \begin{equation} \lb{1.37d}

838: \norm{D^{-1} C}\leq 1.

839: \end{equation}

840: Thus, $\norm{X}<1$ implies $\norm{D^{-1}CX}<1$ so $\bdone+D^{-1}CX$

841: is invertible, and thus

842: so is $D(\bdone+D^{-1}CX)$.

843: \end{proof}

844: 

845: It is a basic result of Cartan \cite{Cartan} (see Helgason

846: \cite{Helg} and the discussion therein) that

847: 

848: \begin{theorem}\lb{T1.3.2} A holomorphic bijection, $g$, of $\bbD_l$

849: to itself is either of

850: the form

851: \begin{equation} \lb{1.38x}

852: g(X)=f_T(X)

853: \end{equation}

854: for some $T\in\bbS\bbU(l,l)$ or

855: \begin{equation} \lb{1.39}

856: g(X)=f_T(X^t).

857: \end{equation}

858: \end{theorem}

859: 

860: Given $\alpha\in\calM_l$ with $\norm{\alpha}<1$, define

861: \begin{equation} \lb{1.40}

862: \rho^L = (\bdone-\alpha^\dagger \alpha)^{1/2}, \qquad

863: \rho^R =(\bdone-\alpha\alpha^\dagger)^{1/2}.

864: \end{equation}

865: 

866: \begin{lemma} \lb{L1.3.3} We have

867: \begin{alignat}{2}

868: \alpha\rho^L &= \rho^R\alpha, \qquad & \alpha^\dagger \rho^R &=

869: \rho^L \alpha^\dagger, \lb{1.41} \\

870: \alpha(\rho^L)^{-1} &= (\rho^R)^{-1}\alpha, \qquad & \alpha^\dagger

871: (\rho^R)^{-1} &= (\rho^L)^{-1}

872: \alpha^\dagger. \lb{1.42}

873: \end{alignat}

874: \end{lemma}

875: 

876: \begin{proof} Let $f$ be analytic in $\bbD$ with $f(z)=\sum_{n=0}^

877: \infty c_n z^n$ its Taylor series at $z=0$.

878: Since $\norm{\alpha^\dagger\alpha}<1$, we have

879: \begin{equation} \lb{1.43}

880: f(\alpha^\dagger \alpha) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty c_n (\alpha^\dagger

881: \alpha)^n

882: \end{equation}

883: norm convergent, so $\alpha (\alpha^\dagger\alpha)^n = (\alpha\alpha^

884: \dagger)^n\alpha$ implies

885: \begin{equation} \lb{1.44}

886: \alpha f(\alpha^\dagger\alpha) = f(\alpha\alpha^\dagger)\alpha,

887: \end{equation}

888: which implies the first halves of \eqref{1.41} and \eqref{1.42}. The

889: other halves follow by

890: taking adjoints.

891: \end{proof}

892: 

893: \begin{theorem}\lb{T1.4} There is a one-one correspondence between $

894: \alpha$'s in $\calM_l$ obeying

895: $\norm{\alpha}<1$ and positive self-adjoint elements of $\bbS\bbU(l,l)

896: $ via

897: \begin{equation} \lb{1.45}

898: T_\alpha = \begin{pmatrix}

899: (\rho^R)^{-1} & (\rho^R)^{-1}\alpha \\

900: (\rho^L)^{-1} \alpha^\dagger & (\rho^L)^{-1}

901: \end{pmatrix}.

902: \end{equation}

903: \end{theorem}

904: 

905: \begin{proof} A straightforward calculation using Lemma~\ref{L1.3.3}

906: proves that $T_\alpha$ is self-adjoint and $T_\alpha^\dagger

907: JT_\alpha =J$. Conversely, if $T$ is self-adjoint, $T=\left(

908: \begin{smallmatrix} A&B\\C&D\end{smallmatrix} \right)$ and in

909: $\bbS\bbU(l,l)$, then $T^\dagger = T\Rightarrow A^\dagger = A$,

910: $B^\dagger =C$, so \eqref{1.61a} becomes

911: \begin{equation} \lb{1.46}

912: AA^\dagger - BB^\dagger =\bdone,

913: \end{equation}

914: so if

915: \begin{equation} \lb{1.47}

916: \alpha = A^{-1} B,

917: \end{equation}

918: then \eqref{1.46} becomes

919: \begin{equation} \lb{1.48}

920: A^{-1} (A^{-1})^\dagger + \alpha\alpha^\dagger =\bdone.

921: \end{equation}

922: Since $T\geq 0$, $A\geq 0$ so \eqref{1.48} implies $A=(\rho^R)^{-1}$,

923: and then \eqref{1.47} implies

924: $B=(\rho^R)^{-1} \alpha$.

925: 

926: By Lemma~\ref{L1.3.3},

927: \begin{equation} \lb{1.49}

928: C=B^\dagger = \alpha^\dagger (\rho^R)^{-1} = (\rho^L)^{-1} \alpha^

929: \dagger

930: \end{equation}

931: and then (by $D=D^\dagger$, $C^\dagger =B$, and \eqref{1.61a})

932: $D D^\dagger - C C^\dagger =\bdone$ plus $D>0$ implies

933: $D= (\rho^L)^{-1}$.

934: \end{proof}

935: 

936: \begin{corollary}\lb{C1.3.5} For each $\alpha\in\bbD_l$, the map

937: \begin{equation} \lb{1.50}

938: f_{T_\alpha}(X) = (\rho^R)^{-1} (X+\alpha) (\bdone+\alpha^\dagger X)^

939: {-1} (\rho^L)

940: \end{equation}

941: takes $\bbD_l$ to $\bbD_l$. Its inverse is given by

942: \begin{equation} \lb{1.51}

943: f_{T_\alpha}^{-1}(X) = f_{T_{-\alpha}}(X) = (\rho^R)^{-1} (X-\alpha)

944: (\bdone-\alpha^\dagger X)^{-1} (\rho^L).

945: \end{equation}

946: \end{corollary}

947: 

948: There is an alternate form for the right side of \eqref{1.50}.

949: 

950: \begin{proposition} \lb{P1.6} The following identity holds true for any $X$,

951: $\norm{X}\leq 1$:

952: \begin{equation} \lb{1.82a}

953: \rho^R (1+X\alpha^\dagger)^{-1} (X+\alpha)(\rho^L)^{-1} =

954: (\rho^R)^{-1} (X+\alpha)(1+\alpha^\dagger X)^{-1}\rho^L.

955: \end{equation}

956: \end{proposition}

957: 

958: \begin{proof}

959: By the definition of $\rho^L$ and $\rho^R$, we have

960: $$

961: X (\rho^L)^{-2}(1-\alpha^\dagger\alpha)=(\rho^R)^{-2}(1-\alpha\alpha^\dagger)X.

962: $$

963: Expanding, using \eqref{1.42} and rearranging, we get

964: $$

965: X(\rho^L)^{-2}+\alpha(\rho^L)^{-2}\alpha^\dagger X

966: =

967: (\rho^R)^{-2}X+X\alpha^\dagger(\rho^R)^{-2}\alpha.

968: $$

969: Adding $\alpha(\rho^L)^{-2}+X(\rho^L)^{-2}\alpha^\dagger X$ to both sides and

970: using \eqref{1.42} again, we obtain

971: \begin{multline*}

972: X(\rho^L)^{-2}+\alpha(\rho^L)^{-2}+X(\rho^L)^{-2}\alpha^\dagger X

973: +\alpha(\rho^L)^{-2}\alpha^\dagger X

974: \\

975: =

976: (\rho^R)^{-2}X+(\rho^R)^{-2}\alpha+X\alpha^\dagger(\rho^R)^{-2}X

977: +X\alpha^\dagger(\rho^R)^{-2}\alpha,

978: \end{multline*}

979: which is the same as

980: $$

981: (X+\alpha)(\rho^L)^{-2}(1+\alpha^\dagger X)

982: =

983: (1+X\alpha^\dagger)(\rho^R)^{-2}(X+\alpha).

984: $$

985: Multiplying by $(1+X\alpha^\dagger)^{-1}$ and $(1+\alpha^\dagger X)^{-1}$, we get

986: $$

987: (1+X\alpha^\dagger)^{-1}(X+\alpha)(\rho^L)^{-2}

988: =

989: (\rho^R)^{-2}(X+\alpha)(1+\alpha^\dagger X)^{-1}

990: $$

991: and the statement follows.

992: \end{proof}

993: 

994: 

995: \subsection{Applications and Examples} \lb{s1.4}

996: 

997: There are a number of simple examples which show that beyond their

998: intrinsic mathematical interest, MOPRL

999: and MOPUC have wide application.

1000: 

1001: \subsubsection*{{\rm (a)} Jacobi matrices on a strip} Let $\Lambda

1002: \subset\bbZ^\nu$ be a subset (perhaps infinite) of the

1003: $\nu$-dimensional lattice $\bbZ^\nu$ and let $\ell^2 (\Lambda)$ be

1004: square summable sequences indexed by $\Lambda$. Suppose a real

1005: symmetric matrix $\alpha_{ij}$ is given for all $i,j\in\Lambda$

1006: with $\alpha_{ij}=0$ unless $\abs{i-j}=1$ (nearest neighbors). Let

1007: $\beta_i$ be a real sequence indexed by $i\in\Lambda$. Suppose

1008: \begin{equation} \lb{1.40x}

1009: \sup_{i,j}\, \abs{\alpha_{ij}} + \sup_i\, \abs{\beta_i} <\infty.

1010: \end{equation}

1011: Define a bounded operator, $J$, on $\ell^2(\Lambda)$ by

1012: \begin{equation} \lb{1.41x}

1013: (Ju)_i = \sum_j \alpha_{ij} u_j + \beta_i u_i.

1014: \end{equation}

1015: The sum is finite with at most $2\nu$ elements.

1016: 

1017: The special case $\Lambda =\{1,2,\dots\}$ with $b_i =\beta_i$, $a_i =

1018: \alpha_{i,i+1}>0$

1019: corresponds precisely to classical semi-infinite tridiagonal Jacobi

1020: matrices.

1021: 

1022: Now consider the situation where $\Lambda' \subset\bbZ^{\nu-1}$ is a

1023: finite set with $l$ elements

1024: and

1025: \begin{equation} \lb{1.42x}

1026: \Lambda = \{j\in\bbZ^\nu \, \colon j_1\in \{1,2,\dots\};\, (j_2,

1027: \dots j_\nu)\in\Lambda'\},

1028: \end{equation}

1029: a ``strip'' with cross-section $\Lambda'$. $J$ then has a block $l

1030: \times l$ matrix Jacobi form

1031: where $(\gamma,\delta\in\Lambda'$)

1032: \begin{alignat}{2}

1033: (B_i)_{\gamma\delta} &= b_{(i,\gamma)}, && \qquad (\gamma=\delta), \lb

1034: {1.42y} \\

1035: &= a_{(i,\gamma)(i,\delta)}, && \qquad (\gamma\neq\delta), \lb{1.42z} \\

1036: (A_i)_{\gamma\delta} &= a_{(i,\gamma)(i+1,\delta)}. \lb{1.43x}

1037: \end{alignat}

1038: The nearest neighbor condition says $(A_i)_{\gamma\delta}=0$ if $

1039: \gamma\neq\delta$. If

1040: \begin{equation} \lb{1.44x}

1041: a_{(i,\gamma)(i+1,\gamma)} >0

1042: \end{equation}

1043: for all $i,\gamma$, then $A_i$ is invertible and we have a block

1044: Jacobi matrix of the

1045: kind described in Section~\ref{s2.2} below.

1046: 

1047: By allowing general $A_i,B_i$, we obtain an obvious generalization of

1048: this model---an interpretation of

1049: general MOPRL.

1050: 

1051: Schr\"odinger operators on strips have been studied in part as

1052: approximations to $\bbZ^\nu$; see \cite{CrS,GKM,KS88,Lac,MV,SB04}.

1053: {}From this point of view, it is also natural to allow periodic

1054: boundary conditions in the vertical directions. Furthermore, there

1055: is closely related work on Schr\"odinger (and other) operators

1056: with matrix-valued potentials; see, for example, \cite{BGMS03,

1057: CG01,CG02,CG03,CG04, CGHL00, CGZ07,GS03, GS00, SB07}.

1058: 

1059: \subsubsection*{{\rm (b)} Two-sided Jacobi matrices} This example goes

1060: back at least to Nikishin \cite{Nik}. Consider the

1061: case $\nu=2$, $\Lambda'=\{0,1\}

1062: \subset\bbZ$, and $\Lambda$ as above. Suppose \eqref{1.44x} holds,

1063: and in addition,

1064: \begin{align}

1065: a_{(1,0)(1,1)} &>0, \lb{1.45x} \\

1066: a_{(i,0)(i,1)} &=0,  \quad i=2,3,\dots . \lb{1.46x}

1067: \end{align}

1068: Then there are no links between the rungs of the ``ladder,'' $\{1,2,

1069: \dots\}\times \{0,1\}$ except at the

1070: end and the ladder can be unfolded to $\bbZ$! Thus, a two-sided

1071: Jacobi matrix can be viewed as a special

1072: kind of one-sided $2\times 2$ matrix Jacobi operator.

1073: 

1074: It is known that for two-sided Jacobi matrices, the spectral theory

1075: is determined by the $2\times 2$

1076: matrix

1077: \begin{equation} \lb{1.47x}

1078: d\mu = \begin{pmatrix}

1079: d\mu_{00} & d\mu_{01} \\

1080: d\mu_{10} & d\mu_{11}

1081: \end{pmatrix},

1082: \end{equation}

1083: where $d\mu_{kl}$ is the measure with

1084: \begin{equation} \lb{1.48x}

1085: \jap{\delta_k, (J-\lambda)^{-1}\delta_l} = \int \f{d\mu_{kl}(x)}{x-

1086: \lambda},

1087: \end{equation}

1088: but also that it is very difficult to specify exactly which $d\mu$

1089: correspond to two-sided Jacobi

1090: matrices.

1091: 

1092: This difficulty is illuminated by the theory of MOPRL. By Favard's

1093: theorem (see Theorem~\ref{favard}),

1094: every such $d\mu$ (given by \eqref{1.47x} and positive definite and

1095: non-trivial in a sense we will

1096: describe in Lemma~\ref{nondeg}) yields a unique block Jacobi matrix

1097: with $A_j>0$ (positive definite).

1098: This $d\mu$ comes from a two-sided Jacobi matrix if and only if

1099: \begin{SL}

1100: \item[(a)] $B_j$ is diagonal for $j=2,3,\dots$.

1101: \item[(b)] $A_j$ is diagonal for $j=1,2,\dots$.

1102: \item[(c)] $B_j$ has strictly positive off-diagonal elements.

1103: \end{SL}

1104: These are very complicated indirect conditions on $d\mu$!

1105: 

1106: \subsubsection*{{\rm (c)} Banded matrices} Classical Jacobi matrices

1107: are semi-infinite symmetric

1108: tridiagonal matrices, that is,

1109: \begin{equation} \lb{1.49x}

1110: J_{km}=0 \quad\text{if } \abs{k-m}>1

1111: \end{equation}

1112: with

1113: \begin{equation} \lb{1.50x}

1114: J_{km}>0 \quad\text{if } \abs{k-m}=1.

1115: \end{equation}

1116: 

1117: A natural generalization are $(2l+1)$-diagonal symmetric matrices,

1118: that is,

1119: \begin{alignat}{2}

1120: J_{km} &= 0 &  \quad \text{if } \abs{k-m} &>l \lb{1.51x},  \\

1121: J_{km} &> 0 & \quad \text{if } \abs{k-m} &=l. \lb{1.52x}

1122: \end{alignat}

1123: 

1124: Such a matrix can be partitioned into $l\times l$ blocks, which is

1125: tridiagonal in block. The

1126: conditions \eqref{1.51x} and \eqref{1.52x} are equivalent to $A_k\in

1127: \calL$, the set of lower

1128: triangular matrices; and conversely, $A_k\in\calL$, with $A_k,B_k$

1129: real (and $B_k$ symmetric)

1130: correspond precisely to such banded matrices. This is why we

1131: introduce type~3 MOPRL.

1132: 

1133: Banded matrices correspond to certain higher-order difference

1134: equations. Unlike the second-order

1135: equation (which leads to tridiagonal matrices) where every equation

1136: with positive coefficients is

1137: equivalent via a variable rescaling to a symmetric matrix, only

1138: certain higher-order difference

1139: equations correspond to symmetric block Jacobi matrices.

1140: 

1141: \subsubsection*{{\rm (d)} Magic formula} In \cite{DKSppt}, Damanik,

1142: Killip, and Simon studied

1143: perturbations of Jacobi and CMV matrices with periodic Jacobi

1144: parameters (or Verblunsky coefficients).

1145: They proved that if $\Delta$ is the discriminant of a two-sided

1146: periodic $J_0$, then a bounded

1147: two-sided $J$ has $\Delta(J)=S^p + S^{-p}$ ($(Su)_n\equiv u_{n+1}$)

1148: if and only if $J$ lies

1149: in the isospectral torus of $J_0$. They call this the magic formula.

1150: 

1151: This allows the study of perturbations of the isospectral torus by

1152: studying $\Delta(J)$ which is

1153: a polynomial in $J$ of degree $p$, and so a $2p+1$ banded matrix.

1154: Thus, the study of perturbations

1155: of periodic problems is connected to perturbations of $S^p + S^{-p}$

1156: as block Jacobi matrices.

1157: Indeed, it was this connection that stimulated our interest in MOPRL,

1158: and \cite{DKSppt} uses some

1159: of our results here.

1160: 

1161: \subsubsection*{{\rm (e)} Vector-valued prediction theory} As noted

1162: in Section~\ref{s1.1},

1163: both prediction theory and filtering theory use OPUC and have natural

1164: MOPUC settings that

1165: motivated much of the MOPUC literature.

1166: 

1167: 

1168: 

1169: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

1170: \section{Matrix Orthogonal Polynomials on the Real Line} \lb{s2}

1171: 

1172: \subsection{Preliminaries} \lb{s2.1}

1173: 

1174: OPRL are the most basic and developed of orthogonal polynomials,

1175: and so this chapter on the matrix analogue is the most important

1176: of this survey. We present the basic formulas, assuming enough

1177: familiarity with the scalar case (see

1178: \cite{Chi,FrB,S,Rice,Szb,Teschl}) that we do not need to explain

1179: why the objects we define are important.

1180: 

1181: \subsubsection{Polynomials, Inner Products, Norms} \lb{s2.1.1}

1182: 

1183: Let $d\mu$ be an $l\times l$ matrix-valued Hermitian positive

1184: semi-definite finite measure on $\R$

1185: normalized by $\mu(\R)={\boldsymbol 1}\in\calM_l $.

1186: We assume for simplicity that $\mu$ has a compact support.

1187: However, many of the results below do not need the latter restriction and in fact can be

1188: found in the literature for matrix-valued measures with unbounded support.

1189: 

1190: 

1191: Define (as in

1192: \eqref{1.24})

1193: \begin{alignat*}{3}

1194: \ang{f , g}_R &= \int f(x)^\dagger \, d\mu(x) \, g(x), \quad & \norm

1195: {f}_R & =(\Tr \ang{f,f}_R)^{1/2},

1196: \quad & f,g & \in\pol, \\

1197: \ang{f , g}_L &= \int g(x)\, d\mu(x) \, f(x)^\dagger,

1198: \quad & \norm{f}_L &=(\Tr \ang{f,f}_L)^{1/2}, \quad & f,g &\in \pol.

1199: \end{alignat*}

1200: Clearly, we have

1201: \begin{alignat}{2}

1202: \ang{f,g}_R^\dagger &=\ang{g,f}_R, \qquad

1203: & \ang{f,g}_L^\dagger & =\ang{g,f}_L, \label{b1} \\

1204: \ang{f,g}_L &=\ang{g^\dagger,f^\dagger}_R, \qquad

1205: & \norm{f}_L &=\norm{f^\dagger}_R. \label{b2}

1206: \end{alignat}

1207: 

1208: As noted in Section~\ref{s1.2}, we have the left and right analogues

1209: of the Cauchy inequality

1210: $$

1211: \abs{\Tr \ang{f,g}_R}\leq \norm{f}_R\norm{g}_R,

1212: \quad

1213: \abs{\Tr \ang{f,g}_L}\leq \norm{f}_L\, \norm{g}_L.

1214: $$

1215: Thus, $\norm{\cdot}_R$ and $\norm{\cdot}_L$ are semi-norms in $\pol$.

1216: Indeed, as noted

1217: in Section~\ref{s1.2}, they are associated to an inner product. The

1218: sets $\{ f \,\colon

1219: \norm{f}_R = 0\}$ and $\{ f \, \colon \norm{f}_L = 0\}$ are linear

1220: subspaces. Let $\pol_R$ be

1221: the completion of $\pol / \{ f \, \colon \norm{f}_R = 0\}$ (viewed as

1222: a right module over $\calM_l$)

1223: with respect to the norm $\norm{\cdot}_R$. Similarly, let $\pol_L$ be

1224: the completion of $\pol

1225: / \{ f \, \colon \norm{f}_L = 0\}$ (viewed as a left module) with

1226: respect to the norm

1227: $\norm{\cdot}_L$.

1228: 

1229: The set $\mathcal{V}$ defined in Section~\ref{s1.2} is a linear space.

1230: Let us introduce a semi-norm in $\mathcal{V}$ by

1231: \begin{equation}\label{f.vsn}

1232: \snorm{f}=\biggl\{\int d\langle f(x), \mu(x) f(x)\rangle_{\C^l}\biggr

1233: \}^{1/2}.

1234: \end{equation}

1235: Let $\mathcal{V}_0\subset \mathcal{V}$ be the linear subspace of all

1236: polynomials such that $\snorm{f}=0$ and let $\mathcal{V}_\infty$ be

1237: the completion of the quotient space $\mathcal{V}/ \mathcal{V}_0$

1238: with respect to the norm $\snorm{\cdot}$.

1239: 

1240: \begin{lemma}\label{nondeg}

1241: The following are equivalent:

1242: \begin{SL}

1243: \item[{\rm{(1)}}] $\norm{f}_R > 0$ for every non-zero $f\in \pol$.

1244: \item[{\rm{(2)}}] For all $n$, the dimension in $\pol_R$ of the set

1245: of all polynomials of degree at most $n$ is

1246: $(n+1)l^2$.

1247: \item[{\rm{(3)}}] $\norm{f}_L > 0$ for every non-zero $f\in \pol$.

1248: \item[{\rm{(4)}}] For all $n$, the dimension in $\pol_L$ of the set

1249: of all polynomials of degree at most $n$ is

1250: $(n+1)l^2$.

1251: \item[{\rm{(5)}}] For every non-zero $v \in \mathcal{V}$, we have that

1252: $\snorm{v} \not= 0$.

1253: \item[{\rm{(6)}}] For all $n$, the dimension in $\mathcal{V}_\infty$

1254: of all vector-valued polynomials

1255: of degree at most $n$ is $(n+1)l$.

1256: \end{SL}

1257: The measure $d\mu$ is called non-trivial if these equivalent

1258: conditions hold.

1259: \end{lemma}

1260: 

1261: \begin{remark} If $l=1$, these are equivalent to the usual non-

1262: triviality

1263: condition, that is, $\supp(\mu)$ is infinite. For

1264: $l>1$, we cannot define triviality in this simple way, as can be

1265: seen by looking at the direct sum of a trivial and non-trivial

1266: measure. In that case, the measure is not non-trivial in the above

1267: sense but its support is infinite.

1268: \end{remark}

1269: 

1270: \begin{proof}

1271: The equivalences  (1) $\Leftrightarrow$ (2),

1272: (3) $\Leftrightarrow$ (4), and  (5) $\Leftrightarrow$ (6)

1273: are immediate. The

1274: equivalence (1) $\Leftrightarrow$ (3) follows from \eqref{b2}.

1275: Let us prove the equivalence (1) $\Leftrightarrow$ (5).

1276: Assume that (1) holds and let $v \in\mathcal{V}$ be non-zero.

1277: Let $f\in\calM_l$ denote the matrix that has $v$ as its leftmost

1278: column and that has zero columns otherwise. Then, $0 \not= \norm{f}^2_R = \Tr \ang{f,f}_R

1279: =\snorm{v}^2$ and hence (5) holds. Now assume that (1) fails

1280: and let $f \in \pol$ be non-zero with $\norm{f}_R = 0$. Then, at

1281: least one of the column

1282: vectors of $f$ is non-zero.

1283: Suppose for simplicity that this is the first column and

1284: denote this column vector by $v$.

1285: Let $t\in\calM_l$ be the matrix $t_{ij}=\delta_{i1}\delta_{j1}$;

1286: then we have

1287: $$

1288: \norm{f}_R=0 \Rightarrow \ang{f,f}_R=0 \Rightarrow

1289: 0=\Tr( t^*\ang{f,f}_R t) =\snorm{v}^2

1290: $$

1291: and hence (5) fails.

1292: \end{proof}

1293: 

1294: 

1295: Throughout the rest of this chapter, we assume the measure $d\mu$ to

1296: be non-trivial.

1297: 

1298: \subsubsection{Monic Orthogonal Polynomials}

1299: 

1300: \begin{lemma}\label{l.b1} Let $d\mu$ be a non-trivial measure.

1301: \begin{SL}

1302: \item[{\rm{(i)}}] There exists a unique monic polynomial $P_n^R$  of

1303: degree $n$, which minimizes

1304: the norm $\norm{P_n^R}_R$.

1305: 

1306: \item[{\rm{(ii)}}] The polynomial $P_n^R$ can be equivalently defined

1307: as the monic polynomial of

1308: degree $n$ which satisfies

1309: \begin{equation}

1310: \ang{P_n^R, f}_R = {\boldsymbol 0} \quad \text{ for any } f\in \pol,

1311: \quad \deg f<n.

1312: \label{b2.2}

1313: \end{equation}

1314: 

1315: \item[{\rm{(iii)}}] There exists a unique monic polynomial $P_n^L$

1316: of degree $n$, which minimizes

1317: the norm $\norm{P_n^L}_L$.

1318: 

1319: \item[{\rm{(iv)}}] The polynomial $P_n^L$ can be equivalently defined

1320: as the monic polynomial of

1321: degree $n$ which satisfies

1322: \begin{equation}

1323: \ang{P_n^L, f}_L = {\boldsymbol 0} \quad \text{ for any } f\in \pol,

1324: \quad \deg f<n.

1325: \label{b2.3}

1326: \end{equation}

1327: 

1328: \item[{\rm{(v)}}] One has $P_n^L(x) = P_n^R(x)^\dagger$ for all  $x

1329: \in \R$ and

1330: \begin{equation}

1331: \label{b2.4} \ang{P_n^R,P_n^R}_R = \ang{P_n^L,P_n^L}_L.

1332: \end{equation}

1333: \end{SL}

1334: \end{lemma}

1335: 

1336: \begin{proof} As noted, $\pol$ has an inner product $\langle\cdot,

1337: \cdot\rangle_R$, so

1338: there is an orthogonal projection $\pi_n^{(R)}$ onto $\pol_n$

1339: discussed in Section~\ref{s1.2}. Then

1340: \begin{equation}\lb{2.6}

1341: P_n^R(x)=x^n -\pi_{n-1}^{(R)}(x^n).

1342: \end{equation}

1343: As usual, in inner product spaces, this uniquely minimizes $x^n-Q$

1344: over all $Q\in\pol_{n-1}$.

1345: It clearly obeys

1346: \begin{equation}\lb{2.6a}

1347: \Tr(\ang{P_n^R,f}_R)=0

1348: \end{equation}

1349: for all $f\in\pol_{n-1}$. But then for any matrix $\alpha$,

1350: \[

1351: \Tr(\ang{P_n^R,f}_R\alpha)=\Tr(\ang{P_n^R,f\alpha}_R)=0

1352: \]

1353: so \eqref{b2.2} holds.

1354: 

1355: This proves (i) and (ii). (iii) and (iv) are similar. To prove (v),

1356: note that

1357: $P_n^L(x)=P_n^R(x)^\dagger$ follows from the criteria \eqref{b2.2},

1358: \eqref{b2.3}.

1359: The identity \eqref{b2.4} follows from \eqref{b2}.

1360: \end{proof}

1361: 

1362: \begin{lemma}\label{l.b2}

1363: Let $\mu$ be non-trivial. For any monic polynomial $P$, we have $\det

1364: \ang{P,P}_R \not= 0$ and

1365: $\det\ang{P,P}_L \not= 0$.

1366: \end{lemma}

1367: 

1368: \begin{proof}

1369: Let $P$ be a monic polynomial of degree $n$ such that $\ang{P,P}_R$

1370: has a non-trivial

1371: kernel. Then one can find $\alpha\in\calM_l$, $\alpha\not=

1372: {\boldsymbol 0}$, such that

1373: $\alpha^\dagger \ang{P,P}_R\alpha = {\boldsymbol 0}$. It follows that

1374: $\norm{P\alpha }_R

1375: = 0$. But since $P$ is monic, the leading coefficient of $P\alpha$ is

1376: $\alpha$, so

1377: $P\alpha \not= {\boldsymbol 0}$, which contradicts the non-triviality

1378: assumption.

1379: A similar argument works for $\ang{P,P}_L$.

1380: \end{proof}

1381: 

1382: By the orthogonality of $Q_n-P_n^R$ to $P_n^R$ for any monic

1383: polynomial $Q_n$ of degree $n$, we have

1384: \begin{equation}\lb{2.7a}

1385: \ang{Q_n,Q_n}_R = \ang{Q-P_n^R, Q-P_n^R}_R + \ang{P_n^R, P_n^R}_R

1386: \end{equation}

1387: and, in particular,

1388: \begin{equation}\lb{2.7b}

1389: \ang{P_n^R,P_n^R}_R \leq \ang{Q_n,Q_n}_R

1390: \end{equation}

1391: with (by non-triviality) equality if and only if $Q_n=P_n^R$.

1392: Since $\Tr$ and $\det$ are strictly monotone on strictly positive

1393: matrices, we have the following variational principles

1394: (\eqref{2.7c} restates (i) of Lemma~\ref{l.b1}):

1395: 

1396: \begin{theorem}\lb{T2.3AA} For any monic $Q_n$ of degree $n$, we have

1397: \begin{gather}

1398: \norm{Q_n}_R \geq \norm{P_n^R}_R, \lb{2.7c} \\

1399: \det\ang{Q_n,Q_n}_R \geq \det\ang{P_n^R,P_n^R}_R \lb{2.7d}

1400: \end{gather}

1401: with equality if and only if $P_n^R=Q_n$.

1402: \end{theorem}

1403: 

1404: 

1405: \subsubsection{Expansion} \lb{s2.1.3}

1406: 

1407: \begin{theorem}\lb{T2.3A} Let $d\mu$ be non-trivial.

1408: \begin{SL}

1409: \item[{\rm{(i)}}] We have

1410: \begin{equation}\lb{2.6A}

1411: \ang{P_k^R,P_n^R}_R = \gamma_n \delta_{kn}

1412: \end{equation}

1413: for some positive invertible matrices $\gamma_n$.

1414: 

1415: \item[{\rm{(ii)}}] $\{P_k^R\}_{k=0}^n$ are a right-module basis for $

1416: \pol_n$; indeed, any $f\in\pol_n$ has

1417: a unique expansion,

1418: \begin{equation}\lb{2.6B}

1419: f=\sum_{j=0}^n P_j^R f_j^R.

1420: \end{equation}

1421: Indeed, essentially by \eqref{1.33c},

1422: \begin{equation}\lb{2.6C}

1423: f_j^R = \gamma_j^{-1} \ang{P_j^R,f}_R.

1424: \end{equation}

1425: \end{SL}

1426: \end{theorem}

1427: 

1428: 

1429: \begin{remark} There are similar formulas for $\ang{\cdot,\cdot}_L$.

1430: By \eqref{b2.4},

1431: \begin{equation}\lb{2.6D}

1432: \ang{P_k^L, P_n^L}_L =\gamma_n \delta_{kn}

1433: \end{equation}

1434: (same $\gamma_n$, which is why we use $\gamma_n$ and not $\gamma_n^R$).

1435: \end{remark}

1436: 

1437: \begin{proof}  (i) \eqref{2.6A} for $n<k$ is immediate from \eqref

1438: {b2.3} and for $n>k$ by symmetry.

1439: $\gamma_n\geq 0$ follows from \eqref{1.25a}. By Lemma~\ref{l.b2}, $

1440: \det(\gamma_n)\neq 0$, so

1441: $\gamma_n$ is invertible.

1442: 

1443: \smallskip

1444: (ii) Map $(\calM_l)^{n+1}$ to $\pol_n$ by

1445: \[

1446: \langle \alpha_0,\dots,\alpha_n\rangle \mapsto \sum_{j=0}^n P_j^R

1447: \alpha_j

1448: \equiv X (\alpha_0, \dots, \alpha_n).

1449: \]

1450: By \eqref{2.6A},

1451: \[

1452: \alpha_j=\gamma_j^{-1} \ang{P_j^R,X(\alpha_0,\dots,\alpha_n)}

1453: \]

1454: so that map is one-one. By dimension counting, it is onto.

1455: \end{proof}

1456: 

1457: \subsubsection{Recurrence Relations for Monic Orthogonal Polynomials}

1458: Denote by $\zeta_n^R$ (resp.\ $\zeta_n^L$) the coefficient of

1459: $x^{n-1}$ in $P_n^R(x)$ (resp.\ $P_n^L(x)$), that is,

1460: \begin{align*}

1461: P_n^R(x)&=x^n \bdone +\zeta_n^R x^{n-1}+\text{lower order terms},

1462: \\

1463: P_n^L(x)&=x^n \bdone +\zeta_n^L x^{n-1}+\text{lower order terms}.

1464: \end{align*}

1465: Since $P_n^R(x)^\dagger=P_n^L(x)$, we have $(\zeta_n^R)^\dagger=

1466: \zeta_n^L$.

1467: Using the parameters $\gamma_n$ of \eqref{2.6A} and $\zeta_n^R$, $

1468: \zeta_n^L$ one can write down

1469: recurrence relations for $P_n^R(x)$, $P_n^L(x)$.

1470: 

1471: \begin{lemma}

1472: \begin{SL}

1473: \item[{\rm{(i)}}] We have a commutation relation

1474: \begin{equation}

1475: \gamma_{n-1}(\zeta_n^R-\zeta_{n-1}^R)

1476: =

1477: (\zeta_n^L-\zeta_{n-1}^L)\gamma_{n-1}.

1478: \label{b.2.7.1}

1479: \end{equation}

1480: 

1481: \item[{\rm{(ii)}}] We have the recurrence relations

1482: \begin{align}

1483: xP_n^R(x)&=P_{n+1}^R(x)+P_n^R(x)(\zeta_n^R-\zeta_{n+1}^R)+P_{n-1}(x)

1484: \gamma_{n-1}^{-1}\gamma_n,

1485: \label{b.2.7.2}

1486: \\

1487: xP_n^L(x)&=P_{n+1}^L(x)+(\zeta_n^L-\zeta_{n+1}^L)P_n^L(x)+\gamma_n

1488: \gamma_{n-1}^{-1}P_{n-1}^L(x).

1489: \label{b.2.7.3}

1490: \end{align}

1491: \end{SL}

1492: \end{lemma}

1493: 

1494: 

1495: \begin{proof}

1496: (i) We have

1497: $$

1498: P_n^R(x)-xP_{n-1}^R(x)=(\zeta_n^R-\zeta_{n-1}^R)x^{n-1}+\text{lower

1499: order terms}

1500: $$

1501: and so

1502: \begin{align*}

1503: (\zeta_n^L-\zeta_{n-1}^L)\gamma_{n-1}

1504: &= (\zeta_n^R-\zeta_{n-1}^R)^\dagger \ang{P_{n-1}^R, P_{n-1}^R}_R \\

1505: & = (\zeta_n^R-\zeta_{n-1}^R)^\dagger \ang{x^{n-1}, P_{n-1}^R}_R \\

1506: & = \ang{P_n^R-xP_{n-1}^R,P_{n-1}^R}_R \\

1507: & = \ang{P_n^R,P_{n-1}^R}_R - \ang{xP_{n-1}^R,P_{n-1}^R}_R \\

1508: & = -\ang{xP_{n-1}^R,P_{n-1}^R}_R \\

1509: & = -\ang{P_{n-1}^R,xP_{n-1}^R}_R \\

1510: & = \ang{P_{n-1}^R,P_n^R-xP_{n-1}^R}_R \\

1511: & = \ang{P_{n-1}^R,x^{n-1}(\zeta_n^R-\zeta_{n-1}^R)}_R \\

1512: & = \ang{P_{n-1}^R,x^{n-1}}_R (\zeta_n^R-\zeta_{n-1}^R) \\

1513: & = \gamma_{n-1} (\zeta_n^R-\zeta_{n-1}^R).

1514: \end{align*}

1515: 

1516: \smallskip

1517: (ii)

1518: By Theorem~\ref{T2.3A},

1519: $$

1520: xP_n^R (x)=P_{n+1}^R(x)C_{n+1}+P_n^R(x)C_n+P_{n-1}^R(x)C_{n-1}+\cdots

1521: +P_0^R C_0

1522: $$

1523: with some matrices $C_0, \dots, C_{n+1}$. It is straightforward

1524: that $C_{n+1}={\boldsymbol 1}$ and $C_n=\zeta_n^R-\zeta_{n+1}^R$. By

1525: the orthogonality property \eqref{b2.2}, we find

1526: $C_0=\dots=C_{n-2} = {\boldsymbol 0}$. Finally, it is easy to

1527: calculate $C_{n-1}$:

1528: \begin{align*}

1529: \gamma_n & = \ang{P_n^R,xP_{n-1}^R}_R = \ang{xP_n^R,P_{n-1}^R}_R \\

1530: & = \ang{P_{n+1}^R+P_n^R(\zeta_n^R-\zeta_{n+1}^R)+P_{n-1}^RC_{n-1},P_

1531: {n-1}^R}_R \\

1532: & = C_{n-1}^\dagger \gamma_{n-1}

1533: \end{align*}

1534: and so, taking adjoints and using self-adjointness of $\gamma_j$, $C_

1535: {n-1} =

1536: \gamma_{n-1}^{-1}\gamma_n$. This proves \eqref{b.2.7.2}; the other

1537: relation \eqref{b.2.7.3}

1538: is obtained by conjugation.

1539: \end{proof}

1540: 

1541: 

1542: \subsubsection{Normalized Orthogonal Polynomials} We call  $p_n^R\in

1543: \pol$ a right orthonormal

1544: polynomial if $\deg p_n^R\leq n$ and

1545: \begin{gather}

1546: \ang{p_n^R,f}_R= \bdzero \text{ for every $f\in \pol$ with } \deg

1547: f<n, \label{b2.8}

1548: \\

1549: \ang{p_n^R,p_n^R}_R={\boldsymbol 1}.

1550: \label{b2.9}

1551: \end{gather}

1552: Similarly, we call  $p_n^L\in \pol$ a left orthonormal polynomial if $

1553: \deg

1554: p_n^L\leq n$ and

1555: \begin{gather}

1556: \ang{p_n^L,f}_L=\bdzero \text{ for every $f\in \pol$ with }\deg f<n,

1557: \label{b2.10}

1558: \\

1559: \ang{p_n^L,p_n^L}_L={\boldsymbol 1}.

1560: \label{b2.11}

1561: \end{gather}

1562: 

1563: \begin{lemma}\label{l.b3}

1564: Any orthonormal polynomial has the form

1565: \begin{equation}

1566: p_n^R(x)=P_n^R(x)\ang{P_n^R,P_n^R}_R^{-1/2}\sigma_n,

1567: \qquad

1568: p_n^L(x)=\tau_n\ang{P_n^L,P_n^L}_L^{-1/2}P_n^L(x)

1569: \label{b2.11.1}

1570: \end{equation}

1571: where $\sigma_n,\tau_n\in\calM_l$ are unitaries. In particular,

1572: $\deg p_n^R=\deg p_n^L=n$.

1573: \end{lemma}

1574: 

1575: \begin{proof}

1576: Let $K_n$ be the coefficient of $x^n$ in $p_n^R$.

1577: Consider the polynomial $q(x)=P_n^R(x) K_n-p_n^R(x)$,

1578: where $P_n^R$ is the monic orthogonal polynomial from Lemma~\ref{l.b1}.

1579: Then $\deg q<n$ and so from \eqref{b2.2} and \eqref{b2.8}, it follows

1580: that

1581: $\ang{q,q}_R=0$ and so $q(x)$

1582: vanishes identically. Thus, we have

1583: \begin{equation}

1584: {\boldsymbol 1}=\ang{p_n^R,p_n^R}_R

1585: =

1586: K_n^\dagger \ang{P_n^R,P_n^R}_R K_n

1587: \label{b.2.12}

1588: \end{equation}

1589: and so $\det(K_n)\not=0$.

1590: {}From \eqref{b.2.12} we get

1591: $(K_n^\dagger)^{-1}K_n^{-1}=\ang{P_n^R,P_n^R}_R$,

1592: and so $K_n K_n^\dagger=\ang{P_n^R,P_n^R}_R^{-1}$.

1593: {}From here we get $K_n=\ang{P_n^R,P_n^R}_R^{-1/2}\sigma_n$

1594: with a unitary $\sigma_n$.

1595: The proof for $p_n^L$ is similar.

1596: \end{proof}

1597: 

1598: By Theorem~\ref{T2.3A}, the polynomials $p_n^R$ form a right

1599: orthonormal module basis in

1600: $\pol_R$. Thus, for any $f\in \pol_R$, we have

1601: \begin{equation}

1602: f(x)=\sum_{m=0}^\infty p_m^R f_m,

1603: \qquad f_m=\ang{p_m^R, f}_R

1604: \label{b5}

1605: \end{equation}

1606: and the Parseval identity

1607: \begin{equation}

1608: \sum_{m=0}^\infty \Tr(f_m f_m^\dagger)=\norm{f}^2_R

1609: \label{b6}

1610: \end{equation}

1611: holds true.

1612: Obviously, since $f$ is a polynomial, there are only finitely many

1613: non-zero

1614: terms in \eqref{b5} and \eqref{b6}.

1615: 

1616: 

1617: \subsection{Block Jacobi Matrices} \lb{s2.2}

1618: 

1619: The study of block Jacobi matrices goes back at least to Krein \cite

1620: {Krein3}.

1621: 

1622: \subsubsection{Block Jacobi Matrices as Matrix Representations}

1623: 

1624: Suppose that a sequence of unitary matrices ${\boldsymbol 1} =

1625: \sigma_0, \sigma_1,

1626: \sigma_2, \ldots$ is fixed, and $p_n^R$ are defined according to

1627: \eqref{b2.11.1}. As

1628: noted above, $p_n^R$ form a right orthonormal basis in $\pol_R$.

1629: 

1630: The map $f(x)\mapsto xf(x)$ can be considered as a right homomorphism

1631: in $\pol_R$.

1632: Consider the matrix $J_{nm}$ of this homomorphism with respect to the

1633: basis $p_n^R$, that

1634: is,

1635: \begin{equation}\lb{2.22a}

1636: J_{nm}=\ang{p_{n-1}^R,xp_{m-1}^R}_R.

1637: \end{equation}

1638: Following Killip--Simon \cite{KS} and Simon \cite{S,S2,Rice}, our

1639: Jacobi matrices are

1640: indexed with $n=1,2,\dots$ but, of course, $p_n$ has $n=0,1,2,\dots$.

1641: That is why

1642: \eqref{2.22a} has $n-1$ and $m-1$.

1643: 

1644: As in the scalar case, using the orthogonality properties of $p_n^R$,

1645: we get that $J_{nm}

1646: = {\boldsymbol 0}$ if $\abs{n-m}>1$. Denote

1647: $$

1648: B_n=J_{nn}=\ang{p_{n-1}^R,x p_{n-1}^R}_R

1649: $$

1650: and

1651: $$

1652: A_n=J_{n,n+1}=J_{n+1,n}^\dagger=\ang{p_{n-1}^R,x p_{n}^R}_R.

1653: $$

1654: Then we have

1655: \begin{equation}

1656: J=

1657: \begin{pmatrix}

1658: B_1 & A_1 & {\boldsymbol 0} & \cdots \\

1659: A_1^\dagger & B_2 & A_2 & \cdots \\

1660: {\boldsymbol 0} & A_2^\dagger & B_3 &  \cdots \\

1661: \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots

1662: \end{pmatrix}

1663: \label{b6.1}

1664: \end{equation}

1665: 

1666: Applying \eqref{b5} to $f(x)=xp_n^R(x)$, we get the recurrence relation

1667: \begin{equation}

1668: xp_n^R(x)=p_{n+1}^R(x)A^\dagger_{n+1}+p_{n}^R(x)B_{n+1}+p_{n-1}^R(x)A_

1669: {n},

1670: \quad

1671: n=1,2,\dots .

1672: \label{b7}

1673: \end{equation}

1674: If we set $p_{-1}^R(x) = {\boldsymbol 0}$ and $A_0={\boldsymbol 1}$,

1675: the relation

1676: \eqref{b7} also holds for $n=0$. By \eqref{b2}, we can always pick

1677: $p_n^L$

1678: so that for $x$ real, $p_n^L(x) = p_n^R(x)^\dagger$, and thus for

1679: complex $z$,

1680: \begin{equation} \lb{2.30a}

1681: p_n^L(z) = p_n^R(\bar z)^\dagger

1682: \end{equation}

1683: by analytic continuation. By conjugating \eqref{b7}, we get

1684: \begin{equation}

1685: xp_n^L(x)=

1686: A_{n+1} p_{n+1}^L(x) + B_{n+1} p_{n}^L(x) +A_{n}^\dagger p_{n-1}^L(x),

1687: \quad

1688: n=0,1,2,\dots .

1689: \label{b8}

1690: \end{equation}

1691: Comparing this with the recurrence relations \eqref{b.2.7.2}, \eqref

1692: {b.2.7.3},

1693: we get

1694: \begin{equation}

1695: A_n=\sigma_{n-1}^\dagger\gamma_{n-1}^{-1/2}\gamma_n^{1/2}\sigma_n,

1696: \qquad

1697: B_n=\sigma_{n-1}^\dagger\gamma_{n-1}^{1/2}(\zeta_{n-1}^R-\zeta_n^R)

1698: \gamma_{n-1}^{-1/2}\sigma_{n-1}.

1699: \label{b8.00}

1700: \end{equation}

1701: In particular, $\det A_n\not=0$ for all $n$.

1702: 

1703: Notice that since $\sigma_n$ is unitary, $\abs{\det(\sigma_n)}=1$, so

1704: \eqref{b8.00} implies $\det(\gamma_n^{1/2}) = \det(\gamma_{n-1}^{1/2})

1705: \abs{\det(A_n)}$ which, by induction, implies that

1706: \begin{equation} \lb{2.32a}

1707: \det \ang{P_n^R,P_n^R} = \abs{\det(A_1\cdots A_n)}^2.

1708: \end{equation}

1709: 

1710: Any block matrix of the form \eqref{b6.1} with $B_n = B_n^\dagger$

1711: and $\det A_n \not= 0$

1712: for all $n$ will be called a block Jacobi matrix corresponding to the

1713: Jacobi parameters

1714: $A_n$ and $B_n$.

1715: 

1716: 

1717: \subsubsection{Basic Properties of Block Jacobi Matrices}

1718: 

1719: Suppose we are given a block Jacobi matrix $J$ corresponding to

1720: Jacobi parameters $A_n$

1721: and $B_n$, where $B_n = B_n^\dagger$ and $\det A_n \not= 0$ for each

1722: $n$.

1723: 

1724: Consider the Hilbert space $\h_v = \ell^2(\Z_+, \C^l)$ (here

1725: $\bbZ_+ = \{1,2,3,\dots\}$) with inner product

1726: $$

1727: \langle f,g \rangle_{\h_v} = \sum_{n=1}^\infty \langle f_n , g_n

1728: \rangle_{\C^l}

1729: $$

1730: and orthonormal basis $\{ e_{k,j} \}_{k \in \Z_+, 1 \le j \le l}$, where

1731: $$

1732: (e_{k,j})_n = \delta_{k,n} v_j

1733: $$

1734: and $\{ v_j \}_{1 \le j \le l}$ is the standard basis of $\C^l$. $J$

1735: acts on $\h_v$ via

1736: \begin{equation}\label{jacobiop}

1737: (J f)_n = A_{n-1}^\dagger f_{n-1} + B_n f_n + A_n f_{n+1}, \quad f\in

1738: \h_v

1739: \end{equation}

1740: (with $f_0 = 0$) and defines a symmetric operator on this space. Note

1741: that using

1742: invertibility of the $A_n$'s, induction shows

1743: \begin{equation}\label{cyclicity}

1744: \Span \{ e_{k,j}\, \colon 1 \le k \le n, \, 1 \le j \le l \} = \Span \{

1745: J^{k-1} e_{1,j}\, \colon 1 \le k \le n, \, 1 \le j \le l \}

1746: \end{equation}

1747: for every $n \ge 1$. We want to emphasize that elements of $\calH_v$

1748: and $\calH$ are

1749: vector-valued and matrix-valued, respectively. For this reason, we

1750: will be interested

1751: in both matrix- and vector-valued solutions of the basic difference

1752: equations.

1753: 

1754: We will consider only bounded block Jacobi matrices, that is, those

1755: corresponding to

1756: Jacobi parameters satisfying

1757: \begin{equation}\label{boundedbjm}

1758: \sup_{n} \, \Tr (A_n^\dagger A_n+B_n^\dagger B_n) < \infty.

1759: \end{equation}

1760: Equivalently,

1761: \begin{equation} \lb{2.29a}

1762: \sup_n (\norm{A_n} + \norm{B_n}) <\infty.

1763: \end{equation}

1764: In this case, $J$ is a bounded self-adjoint operator. This is

1765: equivalent to $\mu$ having

1766: compact support.

1767: 

1768: We call two Jacobi matrices $J$ and $\tilde J$ equivalent if there

1769: exists a sequence of

1770: unitaries $u_n\in\calM_l$, $n\geq 1$, with $u_1={\boldsymbol 1}$ such

1771: that $\tilde

1772: J_{nm}=u_n^\dagger J_{nm} u_m$.

1773: {}From Lemma~\ref{l.b3} it is clear that if $p_n^R$, $\tilde p_n^R$

1774: are two sequences of normalized orthogonal polynomials, corresponding

1775: to the same

1776: measure (but having different normalization), then the Jacobi matrices

1777: $J_{nm}=\ang{p_{n-1}^R, xp_{m-1}^R}_R$ and $\tilde J_{nm}=\ang{\tilde

1778: p_{n-1}^R,

1779: x\tilde p_{m-1}^R}_R$ are equivalent ($u_n=\sigma_{n-1}^\dagger \ti

1780: \sigma_{n-1}$).

1781: Thus,

1782: \begin{equation} \lb{2.35a}

1783: \ti B_n = u_n^\dagger B_n u_n, \qquad \ti A_n = u_n^\dagger A_n u_{n+1}.

1784: \end{equation}

1785: 

1786: Therefore, we have a map

1787: \begin{equation}

1788: \begin{split}

1789: \Phi \,\colon  \mu\mapsto &\{ J \,\colon J_{mn}=\ang{p_{n-1}^R,x p_

1790: {m-1}^R}_R, \, p_n^R \\

1791: &\quad \text{ correspond to $d\mu$ for some normalization}\} \label{Phi}

1792: \end{split}

1793: \end{equation}

1794: from the set of all Hermitian positive semi-definite non-trivial

1795: compactly supported measures to the set of all equivalence classes

1796: of bounded block Jacobi matrices. Below, we will see how to invert

1797: this map.

1798: 

1799: 

1800: \subsubsection{Special Representatives of the Equivalence Classes}

1801: 

1802: Let $J$ be a block Jacobi matrix with the Jacobi parameters $A_n$,

1803: $B_n$. We say that $J$

1804: is:

1805: \begin{itemize}

1806: \item

1807: of type~1, if $A_n>\bdzero$ for all $n$;

1808: \item

1809: of type~2, if $A_1 A_2 \cdots A_n> \bdzero$ for all $n$;

1810: \item

1811: of type~3, if $A_n\in {\mathcal L}$ for all $n$.

1812: \end{itemize}

1813: Here, $\mathcal L$ is the class of all lower triangular matrices

1814: with strictly positive elements on the diagonal. Type~3 is of

1815: interest because they correspond precisely to bounded Hermitian

1816: matrices with $2l+1$ non-vanishing diagonals with the extreme

1817: diagonals strictly positive; see Section~\ref{s1.4}(c). Type~2 is

1818: the case where the leading coefficients of $p_n^R$ are strictly

1819: positive definite.

1820: 

1821: \begin{theorem} \label{l.b4}

1822: \begin{SL}

1823: \item[{\rm{(i)}}] Each equivalence class of block Jacobi matrices

1824: contains exactly one element

1825: each of type~1, type~2, or type~3.

1826: 

1827: \item[{\rm{(ii)}}] Let $J$ be a block Jacobi matrix corresponding to

1828: a sequence of polynomials

1829: $p_n^R$ as in \eqref{b2.11.1}. Then $J$ is of type~2 if and only if $

1830: \sigma_n =

1831: {\boldsymbol 1}$ for all $n$.

1832: \end{SL}

1833: \end{theorem}

1834: 

1835: \begin{proof}

1836: The proof is based on the following two well-known facts:

1837: \begin{SL}

1838: \item[(a)] For any $t\in\calM_l$ with $\det(t)\not=0$, there

1839: exists a unique unitary $u\in \calM_l$ such that $tu$ is Hermitian

1840: positive semi-definite: $tu\geq 0$. \item[(b)] For any

1841: $t\in\calM_l$ with $\det(t)\not=0$, there exists a unique unitary

1842: $u\in\calM_l$ such that $tu\in \calL$.

1843: \end{SL}

1844: 

1845: We first prove that every equivalence class of block Jacobi matrices

1846: contains at least

1847: one element of type~1.

1848: For a given sequence $A_n$, let us construct a sequence $u_1=

1849: \bdone,u_2,u_3,\dots$

1850: of unitaries such that $u_n^\dagger A_n u_{n+1}\geq\bdzero$.

1851: By the existence part of (a), we find $u_2$ such that $A_1 u_2\geq

1852: \bdzero$,

1853: then find $u_3$ such that $u_2^\dagger A_2 u_3\geq\bdzero$, etc.

1854: This, together with \eqref{2.35a}, proves the statement.

1855: In order to  prove the uniqueness part, suppose we have $A_n\geq\bdzero$

1856: and $u_n^\dagger A_n u_{n+1}\geq\bdzero$ for all $n$.

1857: Then, by the uniqueness part of (a), $A_1\geq\bdzero$ and $A_1 u_2

1858: \geq \bdzero$

1859: imply $u_2=\bdone$; next, $A_2\geq\bdzero$ and $u_2^\dagger A_2

1860: u_3=A_2 u_3\geq\bdzero$

1861: imply $u_3=\bdone$, etc.

1862: 

1863: The statement (i) concerning type~$3$ can be proven in the same way,

1864: using (b) instead of

1865: (a).

1866: 

1867: The statement (i) concerning type~$2$ can be proven similarly.

1868: Existence: find $u_2$

1869: such that $A_1 u_2\geq \bdzero$, then $u_3$ such that

1870: $(A_1 u_2)(u_2^\dagger A_2 u_3)=A_1A_2u_3\geq \bdzero$, etc.

1871: Uniqueness: if

1872: $A_1\dots A_n\geq\bdzero$  and $A_1\cdots A_n u_{n+1}\geq\bdzero$,

1873: then $u_{n+1}=\bdone$.

1874: 

1875: By \eqref{b8.00}, we have $A_1 A_2 \cdots A_n = \gamma_n^{1/2}\sigma_n

1876: $ and the statement

1877: (ii) follows from the positivity of $\gamma_n$.

1878: \end{proof}

1879: 

1880: We say that a block Jacobi matrix $J$ belongs to the Nevai class if

1881: $$

1882: B_n\to \bdzero \text{ and } A_n^\dagger A_n\to {\boldsymbol 1} \text

1883: { as }n\to\infty.

1884: $$

1885: It is clear that $J$ is in the Nevai class if and only if all

1886: equivalent Jacobi matrices

1887: belong to the Nevai class.

1888: 

1889: \begin{theorem}\label{l.b5}

1890: If $J$ belongs to the Nevai class and is of type~1 or type~3, then

1891: $A_n\to 1$ as $n\to

1892: \infty$.

1893: \end{theorem}

1894: 

1895: \begin{proof}

1896: If $J$ is of type~$1$, then $A_n^\dagger A_n=A_n^2\to {\boldsymbol 1}

1897: $ clearly

1898: implies $A_n\to {\boldsymbol 1}$ since square root is continuous on

1899: positive Hermitian

1900: matrices.

1901: 

1902: Suppose $J$ is of type~$3$. We shall prove that $A_n\to \bdone$ by

1903: considering the rows

1904: of the matrix $A_n$ one by one, starting from the $l$th row. Denote $

1905: (A_n)_{jk} =

1906: a_{j,k}^{(n)}$. We have

1907: $$

1908: (A_n^\dagger A_n)_{ll}=(a_{l,l}^{(n)})^2\to1,

1909: \text{ and so } a_{l,l}^{(n)} \to1.

1910: $$

1911: Then, for any $k<l$, we have

1912: $$

1913: (A_n^\dagger A_n)_{lk}=a^{(n)}_{l,l}a^{(n)}_{l,k}\to 0,

1914: \text{ and so } a_{l,k}^{(n)} \to 0.

1915: $$

1916: Next, consider the $(l-1)$st row. We have

1917: $$

1918: (A_n^\dagger A_n)_{l-1,l-1}=(a_{l-1,l-1}^{(n)})^2+\abs{a_{l,l-1}^

1919: {(n)}}^2 \to 1

1920: $$

1921: and so, using the previous step, $a_{l-1,l-1}^{(n)}\to1$ as $n\to

1922: \infty$.

1923: Then for all $k<l-1$, we have

1924: $$

1925: (A_n^\dagger A_n)_{l-1,k}=\overline{a_{l-1,l-1}^{(n)}}\, a^{(n)}_{l-1,k}

1926: +\overline{a_{l,l-1}^{(n)}} \, a^{(n)}_{l,k}\to 0

1927: $$

1928: and so, using the previous steps, $a_{l-1,k}\to 0$.

1929: Continuing this way, we get $a^{(n)}_{j,k}\to \delta_{j,k}$ as required.

1930: \end{proof}

1931: 

1932: It is an interesting open question if this result also applies to the

1933: type~2 case.

1934: 

1935: \subsubsection{Favard's Theorem}

1936: 

1937: Here we construct an inverse of the mapping $\Phi$ (defined by \eqref

1938: {Phi}).

1939: Thus, $\Phi$ sets up a bijection between non-trivial measures of compact

1940: support and equivalence classes of bounded block Jacobi matrices.

1941: 

1942: Before proceeding to do this, let us prove:

1943: 

1944: \begin{lemma}\label{l.b6}

1945: The mapping $\Phi$ is injective.

1946: \end{lemma}

1947: 

1948: \begin{proof}

1949: Let $\mu$ and $\tilde \mu$ be two Hermitian positive semi-definite

1950: non-trivial compactly supported measures. Suppose that

1951: $\Phi(\mu)=\Phi(\tilde \mu)$.

1952: 

1953: Let $p_n^R$ and $\tilde p_n^R$ be normalized orthogonal polynomials

1954: corresponding to $\mu$ and $\tilde\mu$. Suppose that the normalization

1955: both for $p_n^R$ and for $\tilde p_n^R$ has been chosen such that

1956: $\sigma_n={\boldsymbol 1}$ (see \eqref{b2.11.1}), that is, type~2.

1957: {}From Lemma~\ref{l.b4} and the assumption $\Phi(\mu)=\Phi(\tilde \mu)

1958: $ it

1959: follows that the corresponding Jacobi matrices coincide, that is,

1960: $\ang{p_n^R,xp_m^R}_R=\ang{\tilde p_n^R,x\tilde p_m^R}_R$

1961: for all $n$ and $m$.

1962: Together with the recurrence relation \eqref{b7} this yields $p_n^R=

1963: \tilde p_n^R$

1964: for all $n$.

1965: 

1966: For any $n \geq 0$, we can represent $x^n$ as

1967: $$

1968: x^n = \sum_{k=0}^{n} p_k^R(x) C^{(n)}_k =\sum_{k=0}^{n} \tilde p^R_k

1969: (x) \tilde C^{(n)}_k.

1970: $$

1971: The coefficients $C^{(n)}_k$ and $\tilde C^{(n)}_k$ are completely

1972: determined by the

1973: coefficients of the polynomials $p_n^R$ and $\tilde p_n^R$ and so

1974: $C^{(n)}_k=\tilde C^{(n)}_k$ for all $n$ and $k$.

1975: 

1976: For the moments of the measure $\mu$, we have

1977: $$

1978: \int x^n d\mu(x)= \ang{{\boldsymbol 1}, x^n}_R

1979: =

1980: \sum_{k=0}^n \ang{ {\boldsymbol 1}, p^R_k C_k^{(n)}}_R

1981: =

1982: \ang{ {\boldsymbol 1}, {\boldsymbol 1}}_R \, C_0^{(n)} =C_0^{(n)}.

1983: $$

1984: Since the same calculation is valid for the measure $\tilde \mu$, we get

1985: $$

1986: \int x^n d\mu(x)=\int x^n d\tilde \mu(x)

1987: $$

1988: for all $n$. It follows that

1989: $$

1990: \int f(x) d\mu(x)g(x)=\int f(x) d\tilde \mu(x) g(x)

1991: $$

1992: for all matrix-valued polynomials $f$ and $g$, and so the measures $

1993: \mu$ and $\tilde \mu$

1994: coincide.

1995: \end{proof}

1996: 

1997: We can now construct the inverse of the map $\Phi$. Let a block

1998: Jacobi matrix $J$ be given. By a version of the spectral theorem

1999: for self-adjoint operators with finite multiplicity (see, e.g.,

2000: \cite[Sect.~72]{AG}), there exists a matrix-valued measure $d\mu$

2001: with

2002: \begin{equation}

2003: \langle e_{1,j} , f(J) e_{1,k} \rangle_{\h_v} = \int f(x) \, d\mu_

2004: {j,k}(x)

2005: \label{defmu}

2006: \end{equation}

2007: and an isometry

2008: $$

2009: R \, \colon \h_v \to L^2(\R,d\mu;\C^l)

2010: $$

2011: such that (recall that $\{v_j\}$ is the standard basis in $\C^l$)

2012: \begin{equation}\label{constant}

2013: [R e_{1,j}](x) = v_j, \quad 1 \le j \le l,

2014: \end{equation}

2015: and, for any $g\in \h_v$, we have

2016: \begin{equation}\label{diagonal}

2017: (RJg)(x) = x (Rg)(x).

2018: \end{equation}

2019: If the Jacobi matrices $J$ and $\tilde J$ are equivalent, then we

2020: have $\tilde J = U^*\! J

2021: U$ for some $U = \oplus_{n=1}^\infty u_n$, $u_1={\boldsymbol 1}$. Thus,

2022: $$

2023: \langle e_{1,j} , f(\tilde J) e_{1,k} \rangle_{\h_v} = \langle U e_

2024: {1,j} , f(J) Ue_{1,k}

2025: \rangle_{\h_v} = \langle  e_{1,j} , f(J) e_{1,k} \rangle_{\h_v}

2026: $$

2027: and so the measures corresponding to $J$ and $\tilde J$ coincide.

2028: Thus, we have a map

2029: \begin{equation}

2030: \Psi \colon \{\tilde J \colon \tilde J \text{ is equivalent to } J\}

2031: \mapsto \mu

2032: \label{Psi}

2033: \end{equation}

2034: from the set of all equivalence classes of bounded block Jacobi

2035: matrices to the set of all Hermitian positive semi-definite

2036: compactly supported measures.

2037: 

2038: \begin{theorem}\label{favard}

2039: \begin{SL}

2040: \item[{\rm{(i)}}] All measures in the image of the map $\Psi$ are non-

2041: degenerate.

2042: \item[{\rm{(ii)}}] $\Phi\circ \Psi=\text{id}$.

2043: \item[{\rm{(iii)}}] $\Psi\circ \Phi=\text{id}$.

2044: \end{SL}

2045: \end{theorem}

2046: 

2047: \begin{proof}

2048: (i) To put things in the right context, we first recall that

2049: $\norm{\cdot}_{\h_v}$ is a norm (rather than a semi-norm), whereas

2050: $\snorm{\cdot}$  on $\mathcal{V}$ (cf.~\eqref{f.vsn}) is, in

2051: general, a semi-norm. Using the assumption that $\det(A_k)\not=0$

2052: for all $k$ (which is included in our definition of a Jacobi

2053: matrix), we will prove that $\snorm{\cdot}$ is in fact a norm.

2054: More precisely, we will prove that  $\snorm{p}>0$ for any

2055: non-zero polynomial $p\in\mathcal{V}$; by Lemma~\ref{nondeg} this will

2056: imply that $\mu$ is non-degenerate.

2057: 

2058: Let $p\in\mathcal{V}$ be a non-zero polynomial, $\deg p=n$. Notice

2059: that \eqref{constant} and \eqref{diagonal} give

2060: \begin{equation}\label{conjugation}

2061: [R J^k e_{1,j}](x) = x^k v_j

2062: \end{equation}

2063: for every $k \ge 0$ and $1 \le j \le l$. This shows that $p$ can

2064: be represented as $p=Rg$, where $g=\sum_{k=0}^n J^k f_k$, and

2065: $f_0, \dots, f_n$ are vectors in $\calH_v$ such that $\langle f_i,

2066: e_{j,k}\rangle_{\calH_v}=0$ for all $i=0,\dots,n$, $j\geq2$,

2067: $k=1,\dots, l$ (i.e., the only non-zero components of $f_j$ are in

2068: the first $\bbC^l$ in $\calH_v$). Assumption $\deg p=n$ means

2069: $f_n\not=0$.

2070: 

2071: Since $R$ is isometric, we have $\snorm{p}=\norm{g}_{\h_v}$, and

2072: so we have to prove that $g\not=0$.  Indeed, suppose that $g=0$.

2073: Using the assumption $\det(A_k)\not=0$ and the tri-diagonal nature

2074: of $J$, we  see that $\sum_{k=0}^n J^k f_k=0$ yields $f_n=0$,

2075: contrary to our assumption.

2076: 

2077: \smallskip

2078: (ii) Consider the elements $R e_{n,k}\in L^2(\R,d\mu;\C^l)$. First

2079: note that, by

2080: \eqref{cyclicity} and \eqref{conjugation}, $R e_{n,k}$ is a

2081: polynomial of degree at most

2082: $n-1$. Next, by the unitarity of $R$, we have

2083: \begin{equation}

2084: \langle R e_{n,k}, R e_{m,j}\rangle_{L^2(\R,d\mu;\C^l)} = \delta_

2085: {m,n} \delta_{k,j}.

2086: \label{ortho}

2087: \end{equation}

2088: Let us construct matrix-valued polynomials $q_n(x)$, using $R e_{n,

2089: 1}, R e_{n,2}, \dots,

2090: R e_{n,l}$ as columns of $q_{n-1}(x)$:

2091: $$

2092: [q_{n-1}(x)]_{j,k} =  [R e_{n,k}(x)]_j.

2093: $$

2094: We have $\deg q_n \leq n$ and $\ang{q_m,q_n}_R = \delta_{m,n}

2095: {\boldsymbol 1}$; the last

2096: relation is just a reformulation of \eqref{ortho}. Hence the $q_n$'s

2097: are right

2098: normalized orthogonal polynomials with respect to the measure $d\mu$.

2099: We find

2100: \begin{align*}

2101: J_{nm} & = [ \langle e_{n,j}, J e_{m,k} \rangle_{\h_v} ]_{1 \le j,k

2102: \le l} \\

2103: & = [ \langle R e_{n,j}, R J e_{m,k} \rangle_{L^2(\R,d\mu;\C^l)} ]_{1

2104: \le j,k \le l} \\

2105: & = [ \langle R e_{n,j}, x R e_{m,k} \rangle_{L^2(\R,d\mu;\C^l)} ]_{1

2106: \le j,k \le l} \\

2107: & =  [ \langle [q_{n-1}(x)]_{\bddot,j}, x

2108: [q_{m-1}(x)]_{\bddot,k} \rangle_{L^2(\R,d\mu;\C^l)}]_{1 \le j,k \le

2109: l} \\

2110: & =  \ang{q_{n-1} , x q_{m-1}}_R

2111: \end{align*}

2112: as required.

2113: 

2114: \smallskip

2115: (iii)

2116: Follows from (ii) and from Lemma~\ref{l.b6}.

2117: \end{proof}

2118: 

2119: 

2120: 

2121: \subsection{The $m$-Function}

2122: 

2123: \subsubsection{The Definition of the $m$-Function}

2124: 

2125: We denote the Borel transform of $d\mu$ by $m$:

2126: \begin{equation}

2127: m(z) = \int \frac{d\mu(x)}{x-z}\,  ,\qquad \Ima z > 0. \label{b.8.0}

2128: \end{equation}

2129: It is a matrix-valued Herglotz function, that is, it is analytic

2130: and obeys $\Ima m(z) > 0$. For information on matrix-valued

2131: Herglotz functions, see \cite {GT} and references therein.

2132: Extensions to operator-valued Herglotz functions can be found in

2133: \cite{GKMT}.

2134: 

2135: \begin{lemma}

2136: Suppose $d\mu$ is given, $p_n^R$ are right normalized orthogonal

2137: polynomials, and $J$ is

2138: the associated block Jacobi matrix. Then,

2139: \begin{equation}\label{mfitop}

2140: m(z) = \ang{p_0^R,(x-z)^{-1}p_0^R}_R

2141: \end{equation}

2142: and

2143: \begin{equation}\label{mfitoj}

2144: m(z) = \langle e_{1,\bddot}, (J-z)^{-1} e_{1,\bddot} \rangle_{\h_v}.

2145: \end{equation}

2146: \end{lemma}

2147: 

2148: \begin{proof}

2149: Since $p_0^R = {\boldsymbol 1}$, \eqref{mfitop} is just a way of

2150: rewriting the definition

2151: of $m$. The second identity, \eqref{mfitoj}, is a consequence of

2152: \eqref{defmu} and

2153: Theorem~\ref{favard}(iii).

2154: \end{proof}

2155: 

2156: 

2157: \subsubsection{Coefficient Stripping}

2158: 

2159: If $J$ is a block Jacobi matrix corresponding to invertible $A_n$'s

2160: and Hermitian

2161: $B_n$'s, we denote the $k$-times stripped block Jacobi matrix,

2162: corresponding to $\{

2163: A_{k+n} , B_{k+n} \}_{n \ge 1}$, by $J^{(k)}$. That is,

2164: $$

2165: J^{(k)} =

2166: \begin{pmatrix}

2167: B_{k+1} & A_{k+1} & {\boldsymbol 0} & \cdots \\

2168: A_{k+1}^\dagger & B_{k+2} & A_{k+2} & \cdots \\

2169: {\boldsymbol 0} & A_{k+2}^\dagger & B_{k+3} &  \cdots \\

2170: \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots

2171: \end{pmatrix}.

2172: $$

2173: The $m$-function corresponding to $J^{(k)}$ will be denoted by $m^

2174: {(k)}$. Note that, in

2175: particular, $J^{(0)} = J$ and $m^{(0)} = m$.

2176: 

2177: \begin{proposition}

2178: Let $J$ be a block Jacobi matrix with $\sigma_\mathrm{ess}(J)

2179: \subseteq [a,b]$. Then, for

2180: every $\varepsilon > 0$, there is $k_0 \ge 0$ such that for $k \ge k_0

2181: $, we have that

2182: $\sigma(J^{(k)}) \subseteq [a-\varepsilon,b+\varepsilon]$.

2183: \end{proposition}

2184: 

2185: \begin{proof}

2186: This is an immediate consequence of (the proof of) \cite[Lemma~1]{Den}.

2187: \end{proof}

2188: 

2189: \begin{proposition}[Due to Aptekarev--Nikishin \cite{AN}]\label{strip}

2190: We have that

2191: $$

2192: m^{(k)}(z)^{-1}  = B_{k+1} - z - A_{k+1} m^{(k+1)}(z) A_{k+1}^\dagger

2193: $$

2194: for $\Ima z > 0$ and $k \ge 0$.

2195: \end{proposition}

2196: 

2197: \begin{proof} It suffices to handle the case $k=0$.

2198: Given \eqref{mfitoj}, this is a special case of a general formula for

2199: $2\times 2$ block

2200: operator matrices, due to Schur \cite{Schur}, that reads

2201: $$

2202: \begin{pmatrix}

2203: A & B \\

2204: C & D

2205: \end{pmatrix}^{-1} = \begin{pmatrix}

2206: (A-BD^{-1}C)^{-1} & -A^{-1} B (D-CA^{-1}B)^{-1} \\

2207: -D^{-1} C (A-BD^{-1}C)^{-1} & (D-CA^{-1}B)^{-1}

2208: \end{pmatrix}

2209: $$

2210: and which is readily verified. Here $A=B_1-z$, $B=A_1$, $C=A_1^\dagger

2211: $, and $D=J^{(1)}-z$.

2212: \end{proof}

2213: 

2214: 

2215: \subsection{Second Kind Polynomials} Define the second kind

2216: polynomials by $q_{-1}^R(z) =

2217: -{\boldsymbol 1}$,

2218: $$

2219: q_n^R(z)=\int_\R d\mu(x) \frac{p_n^R(z)-p_n^R(x)}{z-x},

2220: \quad n=0,1,2,\dots .

2221: $$

2222: As is easy to see, for $n\geq 1$, $q_n^R$ is a polynomial of degree

2223: $n-1$. For future reference,

2224: let us display the first several polynomials $p_n^R$ and $q_n^R$:

2225: \begin{alignat}{3}

2226: p_{-1}^R(x) &= {\boldsymbol 0}, \quad & p_{0}^R(x) &= {\boldsymbol

2227: 1}, \quad & p_{1}^R(x) &=

2228: (x-B_1)A_1^{-1}, \label{b10} \\

2229: q_{-1}^R(x) &= -{\boldsymbol 1}, \quad & q_{0}^R(x) &= {\boldsymbol

2230: 0}, \quad & q_{1}^R(x) &=

2231: A_1^{-1}. \label{b11}

2232: \end{alignat}

2233: The polynomials $q_n^R$ satisfy the equation (same form as \eqref{b7})

2234: \begin{equation}

2235: xq_n^R(x)=q_{n+1}^R(x)A_{n+1}^\dagger+q_{n}^R(x)B_{n+1}+q_{n-1}^R(x)A_

2236: {n},

2237: \quad

2238: n=0,1,2,\dots .

2239: \label{b12}

2240: \end{equation}

2241: For $n=0$, this can be checked by a direct substitution of

2242: \eqref{b11}. For $n\geq1$, as in the scalar case, this can be

2243: checked by taking \eqref{b7} for $x$ and for $z$, subtracting,

2244: dividing by $x-z$, integrating over $d\mu$, and taking into

2245: account the orthogonality relation

2246: $$

2247: \int d\mu(x) p_n^R(x) = {\boldsymbol 0}, \quad n\geq1.

2248: $$

2249: Finally, let us define

2250: $$

2251: \psi_n^R(z)=q_n^R(z)+m(z)p_n^R(z).

2252: $$

2253: According to the definition of $q_n^R$, we have

2254: $$

2255: \psi_n^R(z)=\ang{f_z, p_n^R}_R,

2256: \quad

2257: f_z(x)=(x-\bar{z})^{-1}.

2258: $$

2259: By the Parseval identity, this shows that for all $\Ima z>0$, the

2260: sequence $\psi_n^R(z)$ is in $\ell^2$, that is,

2261: \begin{equation}\lb{2.49ax}

2262: \sum_{n=0}^\infty \Tr (\psi_n^R(z)^\dagger \psi_n^R(z)) <\infty .

2263: \end{equation}

2264: 

2265: In the same way, we define $q_{-1}^L(z)=-{\boldsymbol 1}$,

2266: $$

2267: q_n^L(z)=\int_\R  \frac{p_n^L(z)-p_n^L(x)}{z-x}d\mu(x)\, ,

2268: \quad n=0,1,2,\dots

2269: $$

2270: and $\psi_n^L(z)=q_n^L(z)+p_n^L(z)m(z)$.

2271: 

2272: 

2273: \subsection{Solutions to the Difference Equations} For $\Ima z>0$,

2274: consider the solutions

2275: to the equations

2276: \begin{align}

2277: z u_n(z)&=

2278: \sum_{m=1}^\infty u_m(z) J_{mn},

2279: \quad

2280: n=2,3,\dots,

2281: \label{b15}

2282: \\

2283: z v_n(z)&=

2284: \sum_{m=1}^\infty  J_{nm} v_m(z) ,

2285: \quad

2286: n=2,3,\dots .

2287: \label{b16}

2288: \end{align}

2289: Clearly, $u_n(z)$ solves \eqref{b15} if and only if $v_n(z)=(u_n(\bar

2290: z))^\dagger$

2291: solves \eqref{b16}. In the above, we normally intend $z$ as a fixed

2292: parameter

2293: but it then can be used as a variable. That is, $z$ is fixed and $u_n

2294: (z)$ is a fixed sequence, not a $z$-dependent function. A statement

2295: like $v_n

2296: (z)=

2297: (u_n(\bar z))^\dagger$ means if $u_n$ is a sequence solving \eqref

2298: {b15} for

2299: $z=\bar z_0$, then $v_n$ obeys \eqref{b16} for $z=z_0$. Of course, if

2300: $u_n(z)$

2301: is a function of $z$ in a region, we can apply our estimates to all $z

2302: $ in the

2303: region. For any solution $\{u_n(z)\}_{n=1}^\infty$ of \eqref{b15},

2304: let us define

2305: \begin{equation}\lb{2.49a}

2306: u_0(z)=zu_1(z)-u_1(z) B_1-u_2(z)A_1^\dagger.

2307: \end{equation}

2308: With this definition, the equation \eqref{b15} for $n=1$ is

2309: equivalent to

2310: $u_0(z)=0$. In the same way, we set

2311: $$

2312: v_0(z)=zv_1(z)-B_1 v_1(z) -A_1 v_2(z).

2313: $$

2314: 

2315: 

2316: \begin{lemma}

2317: Let $\Ima z>0$ and suppose $\{u_n(z)\}_{n=0}^\infty$ solves

2318: \eqref{b15} {\rm{(}}for $n\geq 2${\rm{)}} and \eqref{2.49a} and

2319: belongs to $\ell^2$.

2320: Then

2321: \begin{equation}

2322: (\Ima z) \sum_{n=1}^\infty \Tr (u_n(z)^\dagger u_n(z))

2323: =

2324: -\Ima \Tr (u_1(z) u_0(z)^\dagger).

2325: \label{b17}

2326: \end{equation}

2327: In particular, $u_n(z) = \alpha p_{n-1}^R(z)$ is in $\ell^2$ only if

2328: $\alpha=\bdzero$.

2329: \end{lemma}

2330: 

2331: \begin{proof}

2332: Denote $s_n=\Tr (u_n(z) A_{n-1}^\dagger u_{n-1}(z)^\dagger)$. Here

2333: $A_0=\bdone$. Multiplying \eqref{b15} for $n\geq 2$ and

2334: \eqref{2.49a} for $n=1$ by $u_n(z)^\dagger$ on the right, taking

2335: traces, and summing over $n$, we get

2336: $$

2337: z\sum_{n=1}^N \Tr(u_n(z) u_n(z)^\dagger)

2338: =

2339: \sum_{n=1}^N s_{n+1}

2340: + \sum_{n=1}^N \Tr(u_n(z) B_{n+1} u_n(z)^\dagger)

2341: + \sum_{n=1}^N \overline{s_n}\, .

2342: $$

2343: Taking imaginary parts and letting $N\to \infty$, we obtain

2344: \eqref{b17} since the middle sum is real and the outer sums cancel

2345: up to boundary terms. Applying \eqref{b17} to $u_n(z)=\alpha p_{n-1}^R

2346: (z)$,

2347: we get zero in the right-hand side:

2348: $$

2349: (\Ima z)   \sum_{n=1}^\infty \Tr (\alpha p_{n-1}^R(z) p_{n-1}^R(z)^

2350: \dagger\alpha^\dagger)

2351: =0

2352: $$

2353: and hence $\alpha=\bdzero$ since $p_{0}^R=\bdone$.

2354: \end{proof}

2355: 

2356: 

2357: \begin{theorem}\label{t.b1}

2358: Let $\Ima z>0$.

2359: \begin{SL}

2360: \item[{\rm{(i)}}] Any  solution $\{u_n(z)\}_{n=0}^\infty$ of \eqref

2361: {b15} {\rm{(}}for $n\geq 2${\rm{)}}

2362: can be represented as

2363: \begin{equation}

2364: u_n(z)=a p_{n-1}^R(z) + b q_{n-1}^R(z)

2365: \label{b18}

2366: \end{equation}

2367: for suitable $a,b\in\calM_l$. In fact, $a=u_1(z)$ and $b=-u_0(z)$.

2368: 

2369: \item[{\rm{(ii)}}] A sequence  \eqref{b18} satisfies \eqref{b15} for

2370: all $n\geq 1$ if and only if $b=0$.

2371: 

2372: \item[{\rm{(iii)}}] A sequence \eqref{b18} belongs to $\ell^2$ if and

2373: only if $u_n(z)=c\psi_{n-1}^R(z)$ for some

2374: $c\in\calM_l$. Equivalently, a sequence \eqref{b18} belongs to $\ell^2

2375: $ if and only if $u_1(z)+u_0(z)m(z)=0$.

2376: \end{SL}

2377: \end{theorem}

2378: 

2379: \begin{proof}

2380: (i) Let $u_n(z)$ be a solution to \eqref{b15}. Consider

2381: $$

2382: \tilde u_n(z)

2383: =

2384: u_n(z) - u_1(z) p_{n-1}^R(z) + u_0(z)q_{n-1}^R(z).

2385: $$

2386: Then $\tilde u_n(z)$ also solves \eqref{b15} and

2387: $\tilde u_0(z)=\tilde u_1(z)=0$.

2388: It follows that $\tilde u_n(z)=0$ for all $n$. This proves (i).

2389: 

2390: \smallskip

2391: (ii) A direct substitution of \eqref{b18} into \eqref{b15} for $n=1$

2392: yields the statement.

2393: 

2394: \smallskip

2395: (iii)

2396: We already know that $c\psi_{n-1}^R$ is an $\ell^2$ solution.

2397: Suppose that $u_n(z)$ is an $\ell^2$ solution to \eqref{b15}. Rewrite

2398: \eqref{b18} as

2399: $$

2400: u_n(z)=(a-bm(z))p_{n-1}^R(z)+b \psi_{n-1}^R(z).

2401: $$

2402: Since $\psi_n^R$ is in $\ell^2$ and $cp_n^R$ is not in $\ell^2$,

2403: we get $a=bm(z)$, which is equivalent to $u_1(z)+u_0(z)m(z)=0$ or

2404: to $u_n(z)=b\psi_{n-1}^R(z)$.

2405: \end{proof}

2406: 

2407: By conjugation, we obtain:

2408: 

2409: \begin{theorem}\label{t.b2}

2410: Let $\Ima z>0$.

2411: \begin{SL}

2412: \item[{\rm{(i)}}] Any  solution $\{v_n(z)\}_{n=0}^\infty$ of \eqref

2413: {b16} {\rm{(}}for $n\geq 2${\rm{)}}

2414: can be represented as

2415: \begin{equation}

2416: v_n(z)= p_{n-1}^L(z)a + q_{n-1}^L(z)b .

2417: \label{b19}

2418: \end{equation}

2419: In fact, $a=v_1(z)$ and $b=-v_0(z)$.

2420: 

2421: \item[{\rm{(ii)}}] A sequence  \eqref{b19} satisfies \eqref{b16} for

2422: all $n\geq1$ if and only if $b=0$.

2423: 

2424: \item[{\rm{(iii)}}] A sequence \eqref{b19} belongs to $\ell^2$ if

2425: and only if $v_n(z)=\psi_{n-1}^L(z)c$ for some $c\in\calM_l$.

2426: Equivalently, a sequence \eqref{b19} belongs to $\ell^2$ if and

2427: only if $v_1(z)+m(z) v_0(z)=0$.

2428: \end{SL}

2429: \end{theorem}

2430: 

2431: 

2432: \subsection{Wronskians and the Christoffel--Darboux Formula}

2433: 

2434: For any two $\calM_l$-valued sequences $u_n$, $v_n$, define the

2435: Wronskian by

2436: \begin{equation}

2437: W_n(u,v)=u_{n} A_n v_{n+1} - u_{n+1} A_n^\dagger v_{n}. \label{b8.1}

2438: \end{equation}

2439: 

2440: Note that $W_{n}(u, v)= - W_{n}(v^\dagger, u^\dagger)^\dagger$. If

2441: $u_n(z)$ and $v_n(z)$

2442: are solutions to \eqref{b15} and \eqref{b16}, then by a direct

2443: calculation, we see that

2444: $W_n(u(z),v(z))$ is independent of $n$. Put differently, if both $u_n

2445: (z)$ and $v_n(z)$

2446: are solutions to \eqref{b15},

2447: then  $W_n(u(z),v(\bar z)^\dagger)$ is independent of $n$.

2448: Or, if both $u_n(z)$ and $v_n(z)$ are solutions to \eqref{b16},

2449: then  $W_n(u(\bar z)^\dagger, v(z))$ is independent of $n$.

2450: In particular, by a direct evaluation for $n=0$, we get

2451: \begin{align*}

2452: W_n(p_{\bddot\, -1}^R(z), p_{\bddot\, -1}^R(\bar{z})^\dagger)&= W_n(q_

2453: {\bddot\, -1}^R(z),

2454: q_{\bddot\, -1}^R(\bar{z})^\dagger)= \bdzero, \\

2455: W_n(p_{\bddot\, -1}^L(\bar{z})^\dagger, p_{\bddot \, -1}^L(z))&= W_n

2456: (q_{\bddot\, -1}^L(\bar{z})^\dagger,

2457: q_{\bddot\, -1}^L(z))= \bdzero, \\

2458: W_n(p_{\bddot\, -1}^R(z), q_{\bddot\, -1}^R(\bar{z})^\dagger)&= W_n(p_

2459: {\bddot\, -1}^L(\bar{z})^\dagger,

2460: q_{\bddot\, -1}^L(z))={\boldsymbol 1}.

2461: \end{align*}

2462: Let both $u(z)$ and $v(z)$ be solutions to \eqref{b15} of the type

2463: \eqref{b18}, namely,

2464: $$

2465: u_n(z)=a p_{n-1}^R(z) + b q_{n-1}^R(z), \quad v_n(z)=c p_{n-1}^R(z) +

2466: d q_{n-1}^R(z).

2467: $$

2468: Then the above calculation implies

2469: $$

2470: W_n(u(z), v(\bar{z})^\dagger)=ad^\dagger - b c^\dagger.

2471: $$

2472: 

2473: \begin{theorem}[CD Formula]\lb{T2.18}

2474: For any $x,y\in\C$ and $n\geq1$, one has

2475: \begin{equation}

2476: (x-y)\sum_{k=0}^n p_k^R(x) p_k^L(y) = -W_{n+1}(p_{\bddot\, -1}^R(x),

2477: p_{\bddot\, -1}^L(y)). \label{b8.2}

2478: \end{equation}

2479: \end{theorem}

2480: \begin{proof}

2481: Multiplying \eqref{b7} by $p_n^L(y)$ on the right and \eqref{b8}

2482: (with $y$ in place of $x$) by $p_n^R(x)$ on the left and

2483: subtracting, we get

2484: $$

2485: (x-y) p_n^R(x) p_n^R(y) = W_n(p_{\bddot\, -1}^R(x), p_{\bddot\, -1}^L

2486: (y))

2487: -W_{n+1}(p_{\bddot\, -1}^R(x), p_{\bddot\, -1}^L(y)).

2488: $$

2489: Summing over $n$ and noting that $W_0(p^R(x), p^L(y))=0$, we get the

2490: required statement.

2491: \end{proof}

2492: 

2493: 

2494: \subsection{The CD Kernel}\lb{2.7}

2495: 

2496: The CD kernel is defined for $z,w\in\bbC$ by

2497: \begin{align}

2498: K_n(z,w) &= \sum_{k=0}^n p_k^R(z) p_k^R(\bar w)^\dagger \lb{2.54a} \\

2499: &= \sum_{k=0}^n p_k^L (\bar z)^\dagger p_k^L(w). \lb{2.54b}

2500: \end{align}

2501: 

2502: \eqref{2.54b} follows from \eqref{2.54a} and \eqref{2.30a}.

2503: Notice that $K$ is independent of the choices $\sigma_n,\tau_n$ in

2504: \eqref{b2.11.1} and that \eqref{b8.2} can be written

2505: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54c}

2506: (z-\bar w)K_n(z,w) = -W_{n+1} (p_{\bddot\, -1}^R(z), p_{\bddot\, -1}^R

2507: (\bar w)^\dagger).

2508: \end{equation}

2509: 

2510: The independence of $K_n$ of $\sigma,\tau$ can be understood by

2511: noting that if $f_m$ is given by \eqref{b5}, then

2512: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54cA}

2513: \int K_n(z,w)\, d\mu(w) f(w) =\sum_{m=0}^n p_m^R (z) f_m

2514: \end{equation}

2515: so $K$ is the kernel of the orthogonal projection onto polynomials

2516: of degree up to $n$, and so intrinsic. Similarly, if

2517: $f_m^{(L)}=\ang{f, p_m^L}_L$, so

2518: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54d}

2519: f(x)=\sum_{m=0}^\infty f_m^{(L)} p_m^L(x),

2520: \end{equation}

2521: then, by \eqref{2.54b},

2522: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54e}

2523: \int f(z)\, d\mu(z) K_n(z,w) =\sum_{m=0}^n f_m^{(L)} p_m^L (w).

2524: \end{equation}

2525: 

2526: One has

2527: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54f}

2528: \int K_n(z,w)\, d\mu(w) K_n(w,\zeta) =K_n (z,\zeta)

2529: \end{equation}

2530: as can be checked directly and which is an expression of the fact

2531: that the map in \eqref{2.54cA} is a projection, and so its own

2532: square.

2533: 

2534: We will let $\pi_n$ be the map of $L^2 (d\mu)$ to itself given by

2535: \eqref{2.54cA} (or by \eqref{2.54e}). \eqref{2.54c} can then be

2536: viewed (for $z,w\in\bbR$) as an expression of the integral kernel

2537: of the commutator $[J,\pi_n]$, which leads to another proof of it

2538: \cite{Sim-cd}.

2539: 

2540: Let $J_{n;F}$ be the finite $nl\times nl$ matrix obtained from $J$

2541: by taking the top leftmost $n2$ blocks. It is the matrix of

2542: $\pi_{n-1} M_x\pi_{n-1}$ where $M_x$ is multiplication by $x$ in

2543: the $\{p_j^R\}_{j=0}^{n-1}$ basis. For $y\in\bbC$ and

2544: $\gamma\in\bbC^l$, let $\varphi_{n,\gamma}(y)$ be the vector whose

2545: components are

2546: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54g}

2547: (\varphi_{n,\gamma}(y))_j =p_{j-1}^L(y)\gamma

2548: \end{equation}

2549: for $j=1,2,\dots, n$. We claim that

2550: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54h}

2551: [(J_{n;F}-y)\varphi_{n,\gamma}(y)]_j = -\delta_{jn} A_{n} p_n^L(y)\gamma

2552: \end{equation}

2553: as follows immediately from \eqref{b8}.

2554: 

2555: This is intimately related to \eqref{b8.2} and \eqref{2.54c}. For

2556: recalling $J$ is the matrix in

2557: $p^R$ basis, $\varphi_{n,\gamma}(y)$ corresponds to the function

2558: \[

2559: \sum_{j=0}^{n-1} p_j^R(x) (\varphi_{n,\gamma}(y))_{j-1} = K_n (x,y)

2560: \gamma .

2561: \]

2562: As we will see in the next two sections, \eqref{2.54h} has important

2563: consequences.

2564: 

2565: \subsection{Christoffel Variational Principle} \lb{s2.7A}

2566: 

2567: There is a matrix version of the Christoffel variational principle

2568: (see Nevai \cite{NevFr} for a

2569: discussion of uses in the scalar case; this matrix case is discussed

2570: by Duran--Polo \cite{DP}):

2571: 

2572: \begin{theorem}\lb{T2.18A} For any non-trivial $l\times l$ matrix-

2573: valued measure, $d\mu$, on

2574: $\bbR$, we have that for any $n$, any $x_0\in\bbR$, and matrix

2575: polynomials $Q_n(x)$ of degree

2576: at most $n$ with

2577: \begin{equation}\lb{2.66a}

2578: Q_n(x_0)=\bdone,

2579: \end{equation}

2580: we have that

2581: \begin{equation}\lb{2.66b}

2582: \ang{Q_n, Q_n}_R \geq K_n(x_0,x_0)^{-1}

2583: \end{equation}

2584: with equality if and only if

2585: \begin{equation}\lb{2.66c}

2586: Q_n(x) =K_n(x,x_0) K_n(x_0,x_0)^{-1}.

2587: \end{equation}

2588: \end{theorem}

2589: 

2590: \begin{remark} \eqref{2.66b} also holds for $\ang{\cdot,\cdot}_L$ but

2591: the minimizer is then

2592: $K_n(x_0,x_0)^{-1} K_n(x,x_0)$.

2593: \end{remark}

2594: 

2595: \begin{proof} Let $Q_n^{(0)}$ denote the right-hand side of \eqref

2596: {2.66c}. Then for any

2597: polynomial $R_n$ of degree at most $n$, we have

2598: \begin{equation}\lb{2.66d}

2599: \ang{Q_n^{(0)}, R_n}_R = K_n(x_0,x_0)^{-1} R_n(x_0)

2600: \end{equation}

2601: because of \eqref{2.54cA}. Since $Q_n(x_0)=Q_n^{(0)}(x_0)=\bdone$, we

2602: conclude

2603: \begin{equation}\lb{2.66e}

2604: \ang{Q_n-Q_n^{(0)},Q_n-Q_n^{(0)}}_R =\ang{Q_n,Q_n}_R - K_n(x_0,x_0)^{-1}

2605: \end{equation}

2606: from which \eqref{2.66b} is immediate and, given the supposed non-

2607: triviality, the uniqueness of

2608: minimizer.

2609: \end{proof}

2610: 

2611: With this, one easily gets an extension of a result of M\'at\'e--Nevai \cite{MN} to MOPRL.

2612: (They had it for scalar OPUC. For OPUC, it is in M\'at\'e--Nevai--Totik \cite{MNT88}

2613: on $[-1,1]$ and in Totik \cite{Tot} for general OPRL. The result

2614: below can be proven using

2615: polynomial mappings \`a la Totik \cite{Tot-acta} or Jost solutions

2616: \`a la Simon \cite{Weak-cd}.)

2617: 

2618: \begin{theorem} \lb{T2.18B} Let $d\mu$ be a non-trivial $l\times l$

2619: matrix-valued measure on

2620: $\bbR$ with compact support, $E$. Let $I=(a,b)$ be an open interval

2621: with $I\subset E$. Then for

2622: Lebesgue a.e.\ $x\in I$,

2623: \begin{equation}\lb{2.66f}

2624: \limsup (n+1) K_n(x,x)^{-1} \leq w(x).

2625: \end{equation}

2626: \end{theorem}

2627: 

2628: \begin{remark} This is intended in terms of expectations in any fixed

2629: vector.

2630: \end{remark}

2631: 

2632: We state this explicitly since we will need it in Section~\ref

2633: {s5.3A}, but we note that

2634: the more detailed results of M\'at\'e--Nevai--Totik \cite{MNT88},

2635: Lubinsky \cite{Lub},

2636: Simon \cite{2ext}, and Totik \cite{Tot-prep} also extend.

2637: 

2638: 

2639: 

2640: \subsection{Zeros} \lb{s2.8}

2641: 

2642: We next look at zeros of $\det(P_n^L(z))$, which we will prove soon

2643: is also $\det(P_n^R(z))$. Following

2644: \cite{DL,Sinap}, we will identify these zeros with eigenvalues of $J_

2645: {n;F}$. It is not obvious a priori

2646: that these zeros are real and, unlike the scalar situation, where the

2647: classical arguments on the

2648: zeros rely on orthogonality, we do not know how to get reality just

2649: from that (but see the remark

2650: after Theorem~\ref{T2.18E}).

2651: 

2652: \begin{lemma}\lb{L2.18A} Let $C(z)$ be an $l\times l$ matrix-valued

2653: function analytic near $z=0$. Let

2654: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54i}

2655: k=\dim(\ker(C(0))).

2656: \end{equation}

2657: Then $\det(C(z))$ has a zero at $z = 0$ of order at least $k$.

2658: \end{lemma}

2659: 

2660: \begin{remarks} 1. Even in the $1\times 1$ case, where $k=1$, the

2661: zeros can clearly be of higher

2662: order than $k$ since $c_{11}(z)$ can have a zero of any order!

2663: 

2664: \smallskip

2665: 2. The temptation to take products of eigenvalues will lead at best

2666: to a complicated proof

2667: as the cases $C(z)=\left( \begin{smallmatrix} 0&z\\ 1&0 \end

2668: {smallmatrix}\right)$ and $C(z)

2669: =\left(\begin{smallmatrix} 0&z^2 \\ 1&0 \end{smallmatrix}\right)$

2670: illustrate.

2671: \end{remarks}

2672: 

2673: \begin{proof} Let $e_1, \dots , e_l$ be an orthonormal basis with $e_1,

2674: \dots , e_k\in \ker(C(0))$.

2675: By Hadamard's inequality (see Bhatia \cite{Bha}),

2676: \begin{align*}

2677: \abs{\det(C(z))} &\leq \norm{C(z) e_1} \cdots \norm{C(z) e_l} \\

2678: &\leq C\abs{z}^k

2679: \end{align*}

2680: since $\norm{C(z)e_j}\leq C\abs{z}$ if $j=1, \dots, k$ and $\norm{C

2681: (z) e_j}\leq d$ for $j=k+1, \dots, l$.

2682: \end{proof}

2683: 

2684: The following goes back at least to \cite{Dean-Martin}; see also

2685: \cite{DL,SB07,Sinap,SinapVanAsche}.

2686: \begin{theorem}\lb{T2.18BB} We have that

2687: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54j}

2688: \det_{\bbC^l}(P_n^L(z)) =\det_{\bbC^{nl}}(z-J_{n;F}).

2689: \end{equation}

2690: \end{theorem}

2691: 

2692: \begin{proof} By \eqref{2.54h}, if $\gamma$ is such that $p_n^L(y)

2693: \gamma =0$, then $\varphi_{n,\gamma}(y)$ is an eigenvector for

2694: $J_{n;F}$ with eigenvalue $y$. Conversely, if $ \varphi$ is an

2695: eigenvector and $\gamma$ is defined as that vector in $\bbC^l$

2696: whose components are the first $l$ components of $\varphi$, then a

2697: simple inductive argument shows $\varphi=\varphi_{n,\gamma}(y)$

2698: and then, by \eqref{2.54h} and the fact that $A_{n}$ is

2699: invertible, we see that $p_n^L(y)\gamma=0$. This shows that for

2700: any $y$,

2701: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54k}

2702: \dim\ker (P_n^L(y))=\dim\ker (J_{n;F}-y).

2703: \end{equation}

2704: 

2705: By Lemma~\ref{L2.18A}, if $y$ is any eigenvalue of $J_{n;F}$ of

2706: multiplicity $k$, then $\det(P_n^L(z))$ has a zero of order at

2707: least $k$ at $y$. Now let us consider the polynomials in $z$ on

2708: the left and right in \eqref{2.54j}. Since $J_{n;F}$ is Hermitian,

2709: the sum of the multiplicities of the zeros on the right is $nl$.

2710: Since the polynomial on the left is of degree $nl$, by a counting

2711: argument it has the same set of zeros with the same multiplicities

2712: as the polynomial on the right. Since both polynomials are monic,

2713: they are equal.

2714: \end{proof}

2715: 

2716: \begin{corollary}\lb{C2.18C} All the zeros of $\det(P_n^L(z))$ are

2717: real. Moreover,

2718: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54L}

2719: \det(P_n^R(z))=\det(P_n^L(z)).

2720: \end{equation}

2721: \end{corollary}

2722: 

2723: \begin{proof} Since $J_{n;F}$ is Hermitian, all its eigenvalues are

2724: real, so \eqref{2.54j} implies

2725: the zeros of $\det(P_n^L(z))$ are real. Thus, since the polynomial is

2726: monic,

2727: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54m}

2728: \ol{\det(P_n^L(\bar z))} =\det(P_n^L(z)).

2729: \end{equation}

2730: By Lemma~\ref{l.b1}(v), we have

2731: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54n}

2732: P_n^R(z)=P_n^L(\bar z)^\dagger

2733: \end{equation}

2734: since both sides are analytic and agree if $z$ is real. Thus,

2735: \[

2736: \det(P_n^R(z)) =\det(P_n^L(\bar z)^\dagger) =\ol{\det(P_n^L(\bar z))}

2737: \]

2738: proving \eqref{2.54L}.

2739: \end{proof}

2740: 

2741: 

2742: The following appeared before in \cite{SinapVanAsche}; see also

2743: \cite {SB07}.

2744: \begin{corollary} \lb{C2.18D} Let $\{x_{n,j}\}_{j=1}^{nl}$ be the

2745: zeros of $\det(P_n^L(x))$ counting

2746: multiplicity ordered by

2747: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54o}

2748: x_{n,1} \leq x_{n,2} \leq \cdots\leq x_{n,nl}.

2749: \end{equation}

2750: Then

2751: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54p}

2752: x_{n+1,j}\leq x_{n,j} \leq x_{n+1,j+l}.

2753: \end{equation}

2754: \end{corollary}

2755: 

2756: \begin{remarks} 1. This is interlacing if $l=1$ and replaces it for

2757: general $l$.

2758: 

2759: \smallskip

2760: 2. Using $A_n$ invertible, one can show the inequalities in \eqref

2761: {2.54p} are strict.

2762: \end{remarks}

2763: 

2764: \begin{proof} The min-max principle \cite{RS4} says that

2765: \begin{equation} \lb{2.84a}

2766: x_{n,j} = \max_{\substack{ L\subset\bbC^{nl} \\ \dim(L)\leq j-1}}\,

2767: \min_{\substack{f\in L^\perp \\ \norm{f}=1}}

2768: \jap{f,J_{n;F}f}_{\bbC^{nl}}.

2769: \end{equation}

2770: If $P\colon \bbC^{(n+1)l} \to \bbC^{nl}$ is the natural projection, then

2771: $\jap{Pf,J_{n+1;F}Pf}_{\bbC^{(n+1)l}} = \jap{Pf,J_{n;F} Pf}_{\bbC^{nl}}$

2772: and as $L$ runs through all subspaces of $\bbC^{(n+1)l}$ dimension at most

2773: $j-1$, $P[L]$ runs through all subspaces of dimension at most $j-1$ in $\bbC^{nl}$,

2774: so \eqref{2.84a} implies $x_{n+1,j}\leq x_{n,j}$.

2775: Using the same argument on $-J_{n;F}$ and

2776: $-J_{n+1;F}$ shows $x_j(-J_{n;F}) \geq x_j (-J_{n+1;F})$. But $x_j (-

2777: J_{n;F})=-x_{nl+1-j}

2778: (J_{n;F})$ and $x_j(-J_{n+1;F})=-x_{(n+1)l+1-j} (J_{n+1;F})$. That

2779: yields the other inequality.

2780: \end{proof}

2781: 

2782: \subsection{Lower Bounds on $p$ and the Stieltjes--Weyl

2783: Formula for $m$}\lb{s2.9}

2784: 

2785: Next, we want to exploit \eqref{2.54h} to prove uniform lower bounds

2786: on $\norm{p_n^L(y)\gamma}$

2787: when $y\notin \cvh(\sigma(J))$, the convex hull of the support of $J

2788: $, and thereby uniform bounds

2789: $\norm{p_n^L(y)^{-1}}$. We will then use that to prove that for $z

2790: \notin\sigma(J)$, we have

2791: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54q}

2792: m(z)=\lim_{n\to\infty} -p_n^L(z)^{-1} q_n^L(z)

2793: \end{equation}

2794: the matrix analogue of a formula that spectral theorists associate

2795: with Weyl's definition of the

2796: $m$-function \cite{Weyl}, although for the discrete case, it goes

2797: back at least to Stieltjes

2798: \cite{Stie}.

2799: 

2800: We begin by mimicking an argument from \cite{EqMC}. Let $H=\cvh(\sigma

2801: (J))=[c-D,c+D]$ with

2802: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54r}

2803: D=\tfrac12\, \diam(H).

2804: \end{equation}

2805: By the definition of $A_n$,

2806: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54s}

2807: \norm{A_n} =\norm{\ang{p_{n-1}^R, (x-c)p_n^R}_R}\leq D.

2808: \end{equation}

2809: Suppose $y\notin H$ and let

2810: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54t}

2811: d=\dist(y,H).

2812: \end{equation}

2813: By the spectral theorem, for any vector $\varphi\in\h_v$,

2814: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54u}

2815: \abs{\jap{\varphi, (J-y)\varphi}_{\h_v}}\geq d\norm{\varphi}^2.

2816: \end{equation}

2817: 

2818: By \eqref{2.54h}, with $\varphi=\varphi_{n,\gamma}(y)$,

2819: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54v}

2820: \abs{\jap{\varphi, (J-y)\varphi}} \leq \norm{A_{n}}\, \norm{p_n^L(y)

2821: \gamma}\,

2822: \norm{p_{n-1}^L(y)\gamma}

2823: \end{equation}

2824: while

2825: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54w}

2826: \norm{\varphi}^2 =\sum_{j=0}^{n-1} \, \norm{p_j^L(y)\gamma}^2.

2827: \end{equation}

2828: As in \cite[Prop.~2.2]{EqMC}, we get:

2829: 

2830: \begin{theorem}\lb{T2.18E} If $y\notin H$, for any $\gamma$,

2831: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54x}

2832: \norm{p_n^L(y)\gamma}\geq \bigl(\tfrac{d}{D}\bigr)

2833: \bigl(1+\bigl(\tfrac{d}{D}\bigr)^2\bigr)^{(n-1)/2}\norm{\gamma}.

2834: \end{equation}

2835: In particular,

2836: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54y}

2837: \norm{p_n^L(y)^{-1}} \leq \tfrac{D}{d}\, .

2838: \end{equation}

2839: \end{theorem}

2840: 

2841: \begin{remark} \eqref{2.54x} implies $\det(p_n^L(y))\neq 0$ if $\Ima

2842: y >0$, providing

2843: another proof that its zeros are real.

2844: \end{remark}

2845: 

2846: By the discussion after \eqref{b12}, if $\Ima z>0$, $q_n^L(z) + p_n^L

2847: (z)m(z)$ is in $\ell^2$,

2848: so goes to zero. Since $p_n^L(z)^{-1}$ is bounded, we obtain:

2849: 

2850: \begin{corollary}\lb{C2.18F} For any $z\in\bbC_+=\{z : \Ima

2851: z>0\}$,

2852: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54z}

2853: m(z)=\lim_{n\to\infty} -p_n^L(z)^{-1} q_n^L(z).

2854: \end{equation}

2855: \end{corollary}

2856: 

2857: \begin{remark} This holds for $z\notin H$.

2858: \end{remark}

2859: 

2860: Taking adjoints using \eqref{2.54n} and $m(z)^\dagger=m(\bar z)$, we

2861: see that

2862: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54aa}

2863: m(z)=\lim_{n\to\infty}  -q_n^R(z) p_n^R(z)^{-1}.

2864: \end{equation}

2865: 

2866: \eqref{2.54z} and \eqref{2.54aa} are due to \cite{Dur96}, which uses the

2867: proof based on the Gauss--Jacobi quadrature formula.

2868: 

2869: 

2870: \subsection{Wronskians of Vector-Valued Solutions}\lb{s2.10}

2871: 

2872: Let $\alpha,\beta$ be two vector-valued solutions $(\bbC^l)$ of

2873: \eqref {b16} for $n=2,3,\dots$. Define their scalar Wronskian as

2874: (Euclidean inner product on $\bbC^l $)

2875: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54bb}

2876: W_n(\alpha,\beta) =\jap{\alpha_{n}, A_{n}\beta_{n+1}} - \jap{A_{n}

2877: \alpha_{n+1}, \beta_{n}}

2878: \end{equation}

2879: for $n=2,3,\dots$. One can obtain two matrix solutions by using $

2880: \alpha$ or $\beta$ for one column

2881: and $0$ for the other columns. The scalar Wronskian is just a matrix

2882: element of the resulting

2883: matrix Wronskian, so $W_n$ is constant (as can also be seen by direct

2884: calculation). Here is an

2885: application:

2886: 

2887: \begin{theorem}\lb{T2.18F} Let $z_0 \in \R \setminus \sigma_\ess(J)$.

2888: For $k = 0,1$, let $q_k$ be the

2889: multiplicity of $z_0$ as an eigenvalue of $J^{(k)}$. Then, $q_0 + q_1

2890: \le l$.

2891: \end{theorem}

2892: 

2893: \begin{proof} If $\ti\beta$ is an eigenfunction for $J^{(1)}$ and we

2894: define $\beta$ by

2895: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54cc}

2896: \beta_n =\begin{cases} 0, & n=1, \\

2897: \ti\beta_{n-1}, & n\geq 2,

2898: \end{cases}

2899: \end{equation}

2900: then $\beta$ solves \eqref{b16} for $n\geq2$. If $\alpha$ is an

2901: eigenfunction for $J=J^{(0)}$, it also solves \eqref{b16}. Since

2902: $\alpha_n\to 0$, $\beta_n\to 0$, and $A_n$ is bounded,

2903: $W_n(\alpha,\beta)\to 0$ as $n\to\infty$ and so it is identically

2904: zero. But since $\beta_1 =0 $,

2905: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54dd}

2906: \bdzero=W_1(\alpha,\beta) =\jap{\alpha_1, A_1\beta_2} = \jap

2907: {\alpha_1, A_1\ti\beta_1}.

2908: \end{equation}

2909: 

2910: Let $V^{(k)}$ be the set of values of eigenfunctions of $J^{(k)}$ at

2911: $n=1$. \eqref{2.54dd}

2912: says

2913: \begin{equation} \lb{2.54ee}

2914: V^{(0)}\subset [A_1 V^{(1)}]^\perp .

2915: \end{equation}

2916: Since $q_k=\dim(V^{(k)})$ and $A_1$ is non-singular, \eqref{2.54ee}

2917: implies that $q_0\leq l-q_1$.

2918: \end{proof}

2919: 

2920: \subsection{The Order of Zeros/Poles of $m(z)$} \lb{s2.11}

2921: 

2922: \begin{theorem}\lb{T2.18H} Let $z_0 \in \R \setminus \sigma_\ess(J)$.

2923: For $k = 0,1$, let $q_k$ be the

2924: multiplicity of $z_0$ as an eigenvalue of $J^{(k)}$. If $q_1 - q_0

2925: \geq0$, then $\det(m(z))$ has a

2926: zero at $z=z_0$ of order $q_1 - q_0$. If $q_1-q_0<0$, then  $\det(m

2927: (z))$ has a pole at $z=z_0$

2928: of order $q_0 - q_1$.

2929: \end{theorem}

2930: 

2931: \begin{remarks} 1. To say $\det(m(z))$ has a zero at $z=z_0$ of order

2932: $0$ means it is finite

2933: and non-vanishing at $z_0$!

2934: 

2935: \smallskip

2936: 2. Where $d\mu$ is a direct sum of scalar measures, so is $m(z)$, and

2937: $\det(m(z))$ is then a product.

2938: In the scalar case, $m(z)$ has a pole at $z_0$ if $J^{(0)}$ has $z_0$

2939: as eigenvalue and a zero at

2940: $z_0$ if $J^{(1)}$ has $z_0$ as eigenvalue. In the direct sum case,

2941: we see there can be

2942: cancellations, which helps explain why $q_1-q_0$ occurs.

2943: 

2944: \smallskip

2945: 3. Formally, one can understand this theorem as follows. Cramer's

2946: rule suggests $\det(m(z))=

2947: \det (J^{(1)}-z)/\det(J^{(0)}-z)$. Even though $\det(J^{(k)}-z)$ is

2948: not well-defined in the

2949: infinite case, we expect a cancellation of zeros of order $q_1$ and

2950: $q_0$. For $z_0\notin H$,

2951: the convex hull of $\sigma(J^{(0)})$, one can use \eqref{2.54z} to

2952: prove the theorem following

2953: this intuition. Spurious zeros in gaps of $\sigma (J^{(0)})$ make

2954: this strategy difficult in gaps.

2955: 

2956: \smallskip

2957: 4. Unlike in Lemma~\ref{L2.18A}, we can write $m$ as a product of

2958: eigenvalues and analyze that directly because $m(x)$ is

2959: self-adjoint for $x$ real, which sidesteps some of the problems

2960: associated with non-trivial Jordan normal forms.

2961: 

2962: \smallskip

2963: 5. This proof gives another demonstration that $q_0 + q_1\leq l$.

2964: \end{remarks}

2965: 

2966: \begin{proof} $m(z)$ has a simple pole at $z=z_0$ with a residue

2967: which is rank $q_0$ and

2968: strictly negative definite on its range. Let

2969: \[

2970: f(z)=(z-z_0) m(z).

2971: \]

2972: $f$ is analytic near $z_0$ and self-adjoint for $z$ real and near

2973: $z_0$. Thus, by eigenvalue perturbation theory \cite{Kato,RS4},

2974: $f(z)$ has $l$ eigenvalues $\rho_1(z), \dots, \rho_l(z)$ analytic

2975: near $z_0$ with $\rho_1, \rho_2, \dots, \rho_{q_0}$ non-zero at

2976: $z_0$ and $\rho_{q_0+1}, \dots, \rho_l$ zero at $z_0$.

2977: 

2978: Thus, $m(z)$ has $l$ eigenvalues near $z_0$,

2979: $\lambda_j(z)=\rho_j(z)/(z-z_0)$, where $\lambda_1, \dots,

2980: \lambda_{q_0}$ have simple poles and the others are regular.

2981: 

2982: By Proposition~\ref{strip}, $m(z)^{-1}$ has a simple pole at $z_0$

2983: with residue of rank $q_1$ (because $A_1$ is non-singular),

2984: so $m(z)^{-1}$ has

2985: $q_1$ eigenvalues with poles. That means $q_1$ of

2986: $\lambda_{q_0+1}, \dots, \lambda_l$ have simple zeros at $z_0$ and

2987: the others are non-zero. Thus, $\det(m(z))=\prod_{j=1}^l

2988: \lambda_j(z)$ has a pole/zero of order $q_0-q_1$.

2989: \end{proof}

2990: 

2991: 

2992: \subsection{Resolvent of the Jacobi Matrix} Consider the matrix

2993: $$

2994: G_{nm}(z)= \ang{p_{n-1}^R, (x-z)^{-1}p_{m-1}^R}_R.

2995: $$

2996: 

2997: \begin{theorem} \lb{T2.27}

2998: One has

2999: \begin{equation}

3000: G_{nm}(z)=

3001: \begin{cases}

3002: \psi_{n-1}^L(z) p_{m-1}^R(z), & \text{ if $n\geq m$},

3003: \\

3004: p_{n-1}^L(z) \psi_{m-1}^R(z), & \text{ if $n\leq m$}.

3005: \end{cases}

3006: \end{equation}

3007: \end{theorem}

3008: \begin{proof}

3009: We have

3010: \begin{alignat*}{2}

3011: \sum_{m=1}^\infty G_{km}(z) J_{mn} &= z G_{kn}(z),

3012: \quad & n &\not= k,

3013: \\

3014: \sum_{m=1}^\infty  J_{nm} G_{mk}(z) &= z G_{nk}(z),

3015: \quad &  n& \not = k.

3016: \end{alignat*}

3017: Fix $k\geq0$ and let $u_m(z)=G_{km}(z)$. Then $u_m(z)$ satisfies the

3018: equation \eqref{b15}

3019: for $n\not =k$, and so we can use Theorem~\ref{t.b1} to describe this

3020: solution.

3021: First suppose $k>1$. As $u_m$ is an $\ell^2$ solution and $u_m$

3022: satisfies \eqref{b15} for

3023: $n=1$, we have

3024: \begin{equation}

3025: G_{km}(z)=

3026: \begin{cases}

3027: a_k(z) p_{m-1}^R(z), & m\leq k,

3028: \\

3029: b_k(z) \psi_{m-1}^R(z), & m\geq k.

3030: \end{cases}

3031: \label{b20}

3032: \end{equation}

3033: If $k=1$, \eqref{b20} also holds true. For $m\geq k$, this follows by

3034: the same

3035: argument, and for $m=k=1$, this is a trivial statement.

3036: Next, similarly, let us consider $v_m(z)=G_{mk}(z)$.

3037: Then $v_m(z)$ solves \eqref{b16} and so, using Theorem~\ref{t.b2}, we

3038: obtain

3039: \begin{equation}

3040: G_{mk}(z)=

3041: \begin{cases}

3042: p_{m-1}^L(z) c_k(z), & m\leq k,

3043: \\

3044: \psi_{m-1}^L(z) d_k(z) , & m\geq k.

3045: \end{cases}

3046: \label{b21}

3047: \end{equation}

3048: Comparing \eqref{b20} and \eqref{b21}, we find

3049: \begin{align*}

3050: a_k(z) p_{m-1}^R(z) & =  \psi_{k-1}^L(z) d_m(z),

3051: \\

3052: b_k(z) \psi_{m-1}^R(z) & =  p_{k-1}^L(z) c_m(z).

3053: \end{align*}

3054: As $p_0^R=p_0^L={\boldsymbol 1}$,

3055: it follows that

3056: $$

3057: a_k(z)=\psi_{k-1}^L(z) d_1(z),

3058: \qquad

3059: c_m(z)=b_1(z) \psi_{m-1}^R(z)

3060: $$

3061: and so we obtain

3062: \begin{equation}

3063: G_{nm}(z)=

3064: \begin{cases}

3065: \psi_{n-1}^L(z)d_1(z) p_{m-1}^R(z) & \text{ if $n\geq m$},

3066: \\

3067: p_{n-1}^L(z) b_1(z) \psi_{m-1}^R(z) & \text{ if $n\leq m$}.

3068: \end{cases}

3069: \label{b22}

3070: \end{equation}

3071: It remains to prove that

3072: \begin{equation}

3073: b_1(z)=d_1(z)={\boldsymbol 1}.

3074: \label{b23}

3075: \end{equation}

3076: Consider the case $m=n=1$.

3077: By the definition of the resolvent,

3078: $$

3079: G_{11}(z)

3080: =

3081: \ang{p_0^R,(J-z)^{-1}p_0^R}_R

3082: =

3083: \int \frac{d\mu(x)}{x-z}

3084: =

3085: m(z).

3086: $$

3087: On the other hand, by \eqref{b22},

3088: \begin{align*}

3089: G_{11}(z)&=\psi_0^L(z)d_1(z) p_0^R(z)=m(z) d_1(z),

3090: \\

3091: G_{11}(z)&=p_0^L(z) b_1(z) \psi_0^R(z)=b_1(z) m(z),

3092: \end{align*}

3093: which proves \eqref{b23}.

3094: \end{proof}

3095: 

3096: 

3097: 

3098: \section{Matrix Orthogonal Polynomials on the Unit Circle} \lb{s3}

3099: 

3100: \subsection{Definition of MOPUC} \lb{s3.1}

3101: 

3102: In this chapter, $\mu$ is an $l\times l$ matrix-valued measure on $

3103: \partial\bbD$.

3104: $\ang{\cdot,\cdot}_R$ and $\ang{\cdot,\cdot}_L$ are defined as in

3105: the MOPRL case. Non-triviality is defined as for MOPRL. We will

3106: always assume $\mu$ is non-trivial.  We define monic matrix

3107: polynomials $\Phi_n^R, \Phi_n^L$ by applying Gram--Schmidt to

3108: $\{\bdone, z\bdone, \dots\}$, that is, $\Phi_n^R$ is the unique

3109: matrix polynomial $z^n \bdone +$ lower order with

3110: \begin{equation} \lb{3.1}

3111: \ang{z^k\bdone, \Phi_n^R}_R =0 \quad k=0,1,\dots, n-1.

3112: \end{equation}

3113: We will define the normalized MOPUC shortly. We will only consider

3114: the analogue of what we called type~1 for MOPRL because only those

3115: appear to be useful. Unlike in the scalar case, the monic

3116: polynomials do not appear much because it is for the normalized,

3117: but not monic, polynomials that the left and right Verblunsky

3118: coefficients are the same.

3119: 

3120: 

3121: \subsection{The Szeg\H{o} Recursion}

3122: 

3123: Szeg\H{o} \cite{Szb} included the scalar Szeg\H{o} recursion for the

3124: first time. It seems likely

3125: that Geronimus had it independently shortly after Szeg\H{o}. Not

3126: knowing of the connection

3127: with this work, Levinson \cite{Lev} rederived the recursion but with

3128: matrix coefficients!

3129: So the results of this section go back to 1947.

3130: 

3131: For a matrix polynomial $P_n$ of degree $n$, we define the reversed

3132: polynomial $P_n^*$ by

3133: \begin{equation} \lb{3.1a}

3134: P_n^*(z) = z^n P_n(1/\bar{z})^\dagger.

3135: \end{equation}

3136: Notice that

3137: \begin{equation} \lb{3.2x}

3138: (P_n^*)^* = P_n

3139: \end{equation}

3140: and for any $\alpha\in\calM_l$,

3141: \begin{equation} \lb{3.2}

3142: (\alpha P_n)^* = P_n^* \alpha^\dagger, \qquad (P_n\alpha)^* = \alpha^

3143: \dagger P_n^*.

3144: \end{equation}

3145: 

3146: \begin{lemma}

3147: We have

3148: \begin{equation} \lb{3.1ax}

3149: \ang{f , g}_L = \ang{g , f}_L^\dagger \, ,

3150: \qquad

3151: \ang{f , g}_R = \ang{g , f}_R^\dagger

3152: \end{equation}

3153: and

3154: \begin{equation} \lb{3.1b}

3155: \ang{f^* , g^*}_L = \ang{f , g}_R^\dagger \, ,

3156: \quad

3157: \ang{f ^*, g^*}_R = \ang{f ,g}_L^\dagger \, .

3158: \end{equation}

3159: \end{lemma}

3160: 

3161: \begin{proof}

3162: The first and second identities  follow immediately from the

3163: definition. The third identity is

3164: derived as follows:

3165: \begin{align*}

3166: \ang{f^* , g^*}_L & = \int e^{in\theta} g(\theta)^\dagger \,

3167: d\mu(\theta) \, (e^{in\theta} f(\theta)^\dagger)^\dagger \\

3168: & = \int e^{in\theta} g(\theta)^\dagger \, d\mu(\theta) \, e^{-in

3169: \theta} f(\theta) \\

3170: & = \int g(\theta)^\dagger \, d\mu(\theta) \, f(\theta) \\

3171: & = \ang{g , f}_R \\

3172: & = \ang{f , g}_R^\dagger .

3173: \end{align*}

3174: The proof of the last identity is analogous.

3175: \end{proof}

3176: 

3177: \begin{lemma}\label{l.c1}

3178: If $P_n$ has degree $n$ and is left-orthogonal with respect to $z

3179: \bdone, \ldots , z^n \bdone$, then

3180: $P_n = c (\Phi_n^R)^*$ for some suitable matrix $c$.

3181: \end{lemma}

3182: 

3183: \begin{proof}

3184: By assumption,

3185: $$

3186: \bdzero = \ang{P_n , z^j \bdone}_L = \ang{(z^j \bdone)^* , P_n^*}_R =

3187: \ang{z^{n-j} \bdone , P_n^*}_R \; \text{ for } 1

3188: \le j \le n.

3189: $$

3190: Thus, $P_n^*$ is right-orthogonal with respect to $\bdone, z\bdone,

3191: \ldots, z^{n-1} \bdone$ and hence it

3192: is a right-multiple of $\Phi_n^R$. Consequently, $P_n$ is a left-

3193: multiple of

3194: $(\Phi_n^R)^*$.

3195: \end{proof}

3196: 

3197: Let us define normalized orthogonal matrix polynomials by

3198: $$

3199: \varphi_0^L=\varphi_0^R=\bdone,\quad

3200: \varphi_n^L = \kappa_n^L \Phi_n^L \quad \text{ and } \quad \varphi_n^R =

3201: \Phi_n^R\kappa_n^R

3202: $$

3203: where the $\kappa$'s are defined according to the normalization

3204: condition

3205: $$

3206: \ang{\varphi_n^R,\varphi_m^R}_R=\delta_{nm}{\boldsymbol 1}

3207: \quad

3208: \ang{\varphi_n^L,\varphi_m^L}_L=\delta_{nm}{\boldsymbol 1}

3209: $$

3210: along with (a type~1 condition)

3211: \begin{equation}\lb{3.4a}

3212: \kappa_{n+1}^L (\kappa_n^L)^{-1} > \bdzero \quad \text{and} \quad

3213: (\kappa_n^R)^{-1}

3214: \kappa_{n+1}^R > \bdzero.

3215: \end{equation}

3216: Notice that $\kappa_{n}^L$ are determined by the normalization

3217: condition up to multiplication on the left by unitaries; these

3218: unitaries can always be uniquely chosen so as to satisfy

3219: \eqref{3.4a}.

3220: 

3221: Now define

3222: $$

3223: \rho_n^L = \kappa_n^L (\kappa_{n+1}^L)^{-1} \quad \text{and} \quad

3224: \rho_n^R =

3225: (\kappa_{n+1}^R)^{-1} \kappa_n^R.

3226: $$

3227: Notice that as inverses of positives matrices, $\rho_n^L >0$ and $

3228: \rho_n^R >0$.

3229: In particular, we have that

3230: $$

3231: \kappa_n^L = (\rho_{n-1}^L \dots \rho_0^L)^{-1} \quad \text{and}

3232: \quad \kappa_n^R =

3233: (\rho_0^R \dots \rho_{n-1}^R)^{-1}.

3234: $$

3235: 

3236: \begin{theorem}[Szeg\H{o} Recursion]\label{szethm}

3237: \begin{SL}

3238: \item[{\rm{(a)}}] For suitable matrices $\alpha_n^{L,R}$, one has

3239: \begin{align}

3240: z \varphi_n^L - \rho_n^L \varphi_{n+1}^L & = (\alpha_n^L)^\dagger

3241: \varphi_n^{R,*},  \lb{3.5a}\\

3242: z \varphi_n^R - \varphi_{n+1}^R \rho_n^R & = \varphi_n^{L,*}

3243: (\alpha_n^R)^\dagger. \lb{3.5b}

3244: \end{align}

3245: 

3246: \item[{\rm{(b)}}] The matrices $\alpha_n^L$ and $\alpha_n^R$ are

3247: equal and will henceforth be

3248: denoted by $\alpha_n$.\\

3249: 

3250: \item[{\rm{(c)}}] $\rho_n^L = (\bdone - \alpha_n^\dagger \alpha_n)^

3251: {1/2}$ and $\rho_n^R = (\bdone -

3252: \alpha_n \alpha_n^\dagger)^{1/2}$.

3253: \end{SL}

3254: \end{theorem}

3255: 

3256: \begin{proof}

3257: (a) The matrix polynomial $z \varphi_n^L$ has leading term $z^{n+1}

3258: \kappa_n^L$. On the

3259: other hand, the matrix polynomial $\rho_n^L \varphi_{n+1}^L$ has

3260: leading term $z^{n+1}

3261: \rho_n^L \kappa_{n+1}^L$. By definition of $\rho_n^L$, these terms

3262: are equal.

3263: Consequently, $z \varphi_n^L - \rho_n^L \varphi_{n+1}^L$ is a matrix

3264: polynomial of degree

3265: at most $n$. Notice that it is left-orthogonal with respect to $z

3266: \bdone, \ldots , z^n \bdone$ since

3267: $$

3268: \ang{z \varphi_n^L - \rho_n^L \varphi_{n+1}^L , z^j \bdone}_L =

3269: \ang{\varphi_n^L , z^{j-1} \bdone}_L - \ang{\rho_n^L \varphi_{n+1}

3270: ^L , z^j \bdone}_L

3271: = \bdzero - \bdzero = \bdzero.

3272: $$

3273: Now apply Lemma~\ref{l.c1}. The other claim is proved in the same way.\\

3274: 

3275: \smallskip

3276: (b) By part (a) and identities established earlier,

3277: \begin{align*}

3278: (\alpha_n^L)^\dagger & = \bdzero + (\alpha_n^L)^\dagger \bdone \\

3279: & = \ang{\varphi_n^{R,*} , \rho_n^L \varphi_{n+1}^L}_L +

3280: (\alpha_n^L)^\dagger \ang{\varphi_n^R ,  \varphi_n^R} _R \\

3281: & = \ang{\varphi_n^{R,*} , \rho_n^L \varphi_{n+1}^L}_L +

3282: (\alpha_n^L)^\dagger \ang{\varphi_n^{R,*} ,\varphi_n^{R,*}}_L \quad

3283: \text{by \eqref{3.1b}} \\

3284: & = \ang{\varphi_n^{R,*} , \rho_n^L \varphi_{n+1}^L +

3285: (\alpha_n^L)^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*}}_L \\

3286: & = \ang{\varphi_n^{R,*} , z \varphi_n^L}_L \\

3287: & = \ang{z \varphi_n^R , \varphi_n^{L,*}}_R^\dagger  \quad \text

3288: {(using the $(n+1)$-degree *)}\\

3289: & = \ang{\varphi_{n+1}^R \rho_n^R + \varphi_n^{L,*} (\alpha_n^R)^

3290: \dagger ,

3291: \varphi_n^{L,*}}_R^\dagger \\

3292: & = \ang{\varphi_{n+1}^R \rho_n^R , \varphi_n^{L,*}}_R^\dagger

3293: + \ang{\varphi_n^{L,*} (\alpha_n^R)^\dagger , \varphi_n^{L,*}}_R^

3294: \dagger \\

3295: & = \bdzero + \ang{\varphi_n^{L,*} , \varphi_n^{L,*}(\alpha_n^R)^

3296: \dagger}_R \\

3297: & = \ang{\varphi_n^{L,*} , \varphi_n^{L,*}}_R \, (\alpha_n^R)^\dagger \\

3298: & = \ang{\varphi_n^L , \varphi_n^L}_L \,

3299: (\alpha_n^R)^\dagger \\

3300: & = (\alpha_n^R)^\dagger.

3301: \end{align*}

3302: (c) Using parts (a) and (b), we see that

3303: \begin{align*}

3304: \bdone & = \ang{z \varphi_n^L , z \varphi_n^L}_L \\

3305: & = \ang{\rho_n^L \varphi_{n+1}^L + \alpha_n^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*} ,

3306: \rho_n^L \varphi_{n+1}^L + \alpha_n^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*}}_L \\

3307: & = \rho_n^L \ang{\varphi_{n+1}^L , \varphi_{n+1}^L}_L

3308: (\rho_n^L)^\dagger + \alpha_n^\dagger \ang{\varphi_n^{R,*} ,

3309: \varphi_n^{R,*}}_L \, \alpha_n \\

3310: & = (\rho_n^L)2 + \alpha_n^\dagger \ang{\varphi_n^R , \varphi_n^R}_R

3311: \, \alpha_n \\

3312: & = (\rho_n^L)2 + \alpha_n^\dagger \alpha_n.

3313: \end{align*}

3314: A similar calculation yields the other claim.

3315: \end{proof}

3316: 

3317: The matrices $\alpha_n$ will henceforth be called the Verblunsky

3318: coefficients associated

3319: with the measure $d\mu$. Since $\rho_n^L$ is invertible, we have

3320: \begin{equation} \lb{3.3a}

3321: \norm{\alpha_n}<1.

3322: \end{equation}

3323: We will eventually see (Theorem~\ref{T3.10B}) that any set of $

3324: \alpha_n$'s obeying \eqref{3.3a}

3325: occurs as the set of Verblunsky coefficients for a unique non-trivial

3326: measure.

3327: 

3328: 

3329: Note that the Szeg\H{o} recursion for the monic orthogonal

3330: polynomials is

3331: \begin{equation} \label{szmonic}

3332: \begin{aligned}

3333: z \Phi_n^L -  \Phi_{n+1}^L & = (\kappa_n^L)^{-1} \alpha_n^\dagger

3334: (\kappa_n^R)^\dagger\Phi_n^{R,*}, \\

3335: z \Phi_n^R - \Phi_{n+1}^R  & = \Phi_n^{L,*} (\kappa_n^L)^\dagger

3336: \alpha_n^\dagger (\kappa_n^R)^{-1},

3337: \end{aligned}

3338: \end{equation}

3339: so the coefficients in the $L$ and $R$ equations are not equal and

3340: depend on all the

3341: $\alpha_j$, $j=1,\dots, n$.

3342: 

3343: Let us write the Szeg\H{o} recursion in matrix form, starting with

3344: left-orthogonal polynomials. By Theorem \ref{szethm},

3345: \begin{align*}

3346: \varphi_{n+1}^L & = (\rho_n^L)^{-1} [z \varphi_n^L - \alpha_n^\dagger

3347: \varphi_n^{R,*} ], \\

3348: \varphi_{n+1}^R & = [ z \varphi_n^R - \varphi_n^{L,*} \alpha_n^\dagger ]

3349: ( \rho_n^R )^{-1},

3350: \end{align*}

3351: which implies that

3352: \begin{align}

3353: \varphi_{n+1}^L & = z (\rho_n^L)^{-1} \varphi_n^L - (\rho_n^L)^{-1}

3354: \alpha_n^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*}, \lb{3.7a} \\

3355: \varphi_{n+1}^{R,*} & = (\rho_n^R)^{-1} \varphi_n^{R,*} - z (\rho_n^R)

3356: ^{-1}

3357: \alpha_n \varphi_n^L. \lb{3.7b}

3358: \end{align}

3359: In other words,

3360: \begin{equation}

3361: \begin{pmatrix} \varphi_{n+1}^L \\ \varphi_{n+1}^{R,*} \end{pmatrix}

3362: = A^L(\alpha_n,z) \begin{pmatrix} \varphi_n^L \\ \varphi_n^{R,*} \end

3363: {pmatrix}

3364: \label{*1}

3365: \end{equation}

3366: where

3367: $$

3368: A^L(\alpha,z) = \begin{pmatrix} z (\rho^L)^{-1} & - (\rho^L)^{-1}

3369: \alpha^\dagger \\

3370: - z (\rho^R)^{-1} \alpha & (\rho^R)^{-1}

3371: \end{pmatrix}

3372: $$

3373: and $\rho^L = (\bdone - \alpha^\dagger \alpha)^{1/2}$, $\rho^R =

3374: (\bdone - \alpha

3375: \alpha^\dagger)^{1/2}$. Note that, for $z \not= 0$, the inverse of

3376: $A^L(\alpha,z)$ is

3377: given by

3378: $$

3379: A^L(\alpha,z)^{-1} =

3380: \begin{pmatrix}

3381: z^{-1} (\rho^L)^{-1} & z^{-1} (\rho^L)^{-1} \alpha^\dagger \\

3382: (\rho^R)^{-1} \alpha & (\rho^R)^{-1}

3383: \end{pmatrix}

3384: $$

3385: which gives rise to the inverse Szeg\H{o} recursion (first

3386: emphasized in the scalar and matrix cases by Delsarte el al.\

3387: \cite{DGK})

3388: \begin{align*}

3389: \varphi_n^L & =  z^{-1} (\rho_n^L)^{-1} \varphi_{n+1}^L + z^{-1}

3390: (\rho_n^L)^{-1} \alpha_n^\dagger \varphi_{n+1}^{R,*},

3391: \\

3392: \varphi_n^{R,*} & =  (\rho_n^R)^{-1} \alpha_n\varphi_{n+1}^L +

3393: (\rho_n^R)^{-1} \varphi_{n+1}^{R,*}.

3394: \end{align*}

3395: 

3396: For right-orthogonal polynomials, we find the following matrix

3397: formulas. By Theorem~\ref{szethm},

3398: \begin{align}

3399: \varphi_{n+1}^R & = z \varphi_n^R (\rho_n^R)^{-1} - \varphi_n^{L,*}

3400: \alpha_n^\dagger (\rho_n^R)^{-1},  \label{szright1}

3401: \\

3402: \varphi_{n+1}^{L,*} & = \varphi_n^{L,*} (\rho_n^L)^{-1} - z \varphi_n^R

3403: \alpha_n (\rho_n^L)^{-1}.  \label{szright2}

3404: \end{align}

3405: In other words,

3406: $$

3407: \begin{pmatrix} \varphi_{n+1}^R & \varphi_{n+1}^{L,*} \end{pmatrix}  =

3408: \begin{pmatrix} \varphi_n^R & \varphi_n^{L,*} \end{pmatrix} A^R

3409: (\alpha_n,z)

3410: $$

3411: where

3412: $$

3413: A^R(\alpha,z) = \begin{pmatrix}

3414: z (\rho^R)^{-1} & - z \alpha (\rho^L)^{-1} \\

3415: - \alpha^\dagger (\rho^R)^{-1} & (\rho^L)^{-1}

3416: \end{pmatrix}.

3417: $$

3418: For $z \not= 0$, the inverse of $A^R(\alpha,z)$ is given by

3419: $$

3420: A^R(\alpha,z)^{-1} = \begin{pmatrix}

3421: z^{-1} (\rho^R)^{-1} & (\rho^R)^{-1} \alpha \\

3422: z^{-1} (\rho^L)^{-1} \alpha^\dagger & (\rho^L)^{-1}

3423: \end{pmatrix}

3424: $$

3425: and hence

3426: \begin{align}

3427: \varphi_n^R & =  z^{-1} \varphi_{n+1}^R (\rho_n^R)^{-1} + z^{-1}

3428: \varphi_{n+1}^{L,*} (\rho_n^L)^{-1} \alpha_n^\dagger,  \label{szright3}

3429: \\

3430: \varphi_n^{L,*} & =  \varphi_{n+1}^R (\rho_n^R)^{-1} \alpha_n +

3431: \varphi_{n+1}^{L,*} (\rho_n^L)^{-1}. \label{szright4}

3432: \end{align}

3433: 

3434: 

3435: 

3436: \subsection{Second Kind Polynomials} \lb{s3.3}

3437: 

3438: In the scalar case, second kind polynomials go back to Geronimus \cite

3439: {Ger44,GBk1,GBk}.

3440: For $n\geq1$, let us introduce the second kind polynomials $\psi_n^

3441: {L,R}$ by

3442: \begin{align}

3443: \psi_n^L (z)&= \int \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z}\,

3444: (\varphi_n^L ( e^{i\theta} )

3445: -\varphi_n^L (z) ) \, d\mu (\theta), \label{a1}

3446: \\

3447: \psi_n^R (z)&= \int \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z} \, d\mu

3448: (\theta) \, (\varphi_n^R

3449: ( e^{i\theta} ) -\varphi_n^R (z) ) . \label{a2}

3450: \end{align}

3451: For $n=0$, let us set $\psi_0^L (z)=\psi_0^R (z)=\bdone$. For

3452: future reference, let us display the first polynomials of each

3453: series:

3454: \begin{align}

3455: \varphi_1^L(z)&=(\rho_0^L)^{-1}(z-\alpha_0^\dagger),

3456: \qquad

3457: \varphi_1^R(z)=(z-\alpha_0^\dagger)(\rho_0^R)^{-1},

3458: \label{firstpoly1}

3459: \\

3460: \psi_1^L(z)&=(\rho_0^L)^{-1}(z+\alpha_0^\dagger),

3461: \qquad

3462: \psi_1^R(z)=(z+\alpha_0^\dagger)(\rho_0^R)^{-1}.

3463: \label{firstpoly2}

3464: \end{align}

3465: We will also need formulas for

3466: $\psi_n^{L,*}$ and $\psi_n^{R,*}$, $n\geq1$. These formulas follow

3467: directly from the

3468: above definition and from

3469: $$

3470: \overline{\left(\frac{e^{i\theta}+1/\bar z}{e^{i\theta}-1/\bar z}

3471: \right)} =

3472: -\frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z}\, .

3473: $$

3474: Indeed, we have

3475: \begin{align}

3476: \psi_n^{L,*} (z)&= z^n \int \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z} \, d

3477: \mu (\theta) \,

3478: (\varphi_n^L (1/\bar z )^\dagger -\varphi_n^L (e^{i\theta})^\dagger),

3479: \label{a2a}

3480: \\

3481: \psi_n^{R,*} (z)&= z^n \int \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z}\,

3482: (\varphi_n^R

3483: (1/\bar z )^\dagger -\varphi_n^R (e^{i\theta})^\dagger) \, d\mu

3484: (\theta).

3485: \label{a3}

3486: \end{align}

3487: 

3488: \begin{proposition}

3489: The second kind polynomials obey the recurrence relations

3490: \begin{align}

3491: \psi_{n+1}^L(z)&=(\rho_n^L)^{-1}(z\psi_n^L(z)+\alpha_n^\dagger \psi_

3492: {n}^{R,*}(z)),

3493: \label{a4}

3494: \\

3495: \psi_{n+1}^{R,*}(z)&=(\rho_n^R)^{-1}(z\alpha_n \psi_{n}^L(z)+\psi_{n}^

3496: {R,*}(z))

3497: \label{a5}

3498: \end{align}

3499: and

3500: \begin{align}

3501: \psi_{n+1}^R(z) & = (z \psi_n^R(z) + \psi_n^{L,*}(z) \alpha_n^

3502: \dagger) (\rho_n^R)^{-1}, \label{a4r}

3503: \\

3504: \psi_{n+1}^{L,*}(z) & = (\psi_n^{L,*}(z) + z \psi_n^R(z) \alpha_n)

3505: (\rho_n^L)^{-1} \label{a5r}

3506: \end{align}

3507: for $n\geq0$.

3508: \end{proposition}

3509: \begin{proof}

3510: 1. Let us check \eqref{a4} for $n\geq1$. Denote the right-hand side

3511: of \eqref{a4} by

3512: $\tilde\psi_{n+1}^L(z)$. Using the recurrence relations for $

3513: \varphi_n^L$, $\varphi_n^{R,*}$ and

3514: the definition \eqref{a1} of $\psi_n^L$, we find

3515: $$

3516: \psi_{n+1}^L(z)- \tilde \psi_{n+1}^L(z) = \int \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^

3517: {i\theta}-z} \,

3518: A_n(\theta,z) \, d\mu(\theta)

3519: $$

3520: where

3521: \begin{align*}

3522: A_n(\theta,z) & = \varphi_{n+1}^L(e^{i\theta}) -\varphi_{n+1}^L(z)

3523: \\

3524: & \qquad - (\rho_n^L)^{-1}[z \varphi_{n}^L(e^{i\theta}) -z\varphi_{n}

3525: ^L(z) +

3526: \alpha_n^\dagger z^n \varphi_n^R(1/\bar z)^\dagger

3527: - \alpha_n^\dagger z^n \varphi_n^R(e^{i\theta})^\dagger]

3528: \\

3529: & = (\rho_n^L)^{-1} [ e^{i\theta}\varphi_{n}^L(e^{i\theta}) -

3530: \alpha_n^\dagger\varphi_{n}^{R,*}(e^{i\theta}) -

3531: z\varphi_{n}^L(z)+\alpha_n^\dagger\varphi_{n}^{R,*}(z)

3532: \\

3533: & \qquad - z \varphi_{n}^L(e^{i\theta}) +z\varphi_{n}^L(z) - \alpha_n^

3534: \dagger

3535: \varphi_n^{R,*}(z) + \alpha_n^\dagger z^n

3536: \varphi_n^R(e^{i\theta})^\dagger ]

3537: \\

3538: & = (\rho_n^L)^{-1}[(e^{i\theta}-z)\varphi_{n}^L(e^{i\theta}) +

3539: \alpha_n^\dagger(z^n

3540: e^{-in\theta}-1)\varphi_n^{R,*}(e^{i\theta})].

3541: \end{align*}

3542: Using the orthogonality relations

3543: \begin{equation}

3544: \int \varphi_n^L(e^{i\theta})\, d\mu(\theta) e^{-im\theta} = \int

3545: \varphi_n^{R,*}(e^{i\theta})\, d\mu(\theta) e^{-i(m+1)\theta} =

3546: \bdzero, \label{a6}

3547: \end{equation}

3548: $m=0,1,\dots,n-1$, and the formula

3549: $$

3550: \frac{e^{in\theta}-z^n}{e^{i\theta}-z} =

3551: e^{i(n-1)\theta}+e^{i(n-2)\theta}z+\dots+z^{n-1}

3552: $$

3553: we obtain

3554: \begin{align*}

3555: \rho_n^L \int \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z}\, A_n(\theta,z)\, d

3556: \mu(\theta) & = \int

3557: (e^{i\theta}\varphi_n^L(e^{i\theta}) - \alpha_n^\dagger

3558: \varphi_n^{R,*}(e^{i\theta}))\, d\mu(\theta) \\

3559: & = \rho_n^L\int \varphi_{n+1}^L (e^{i\theta}) \, d\mu(\theta) =

3560: \bdzero.

3561: \end{align*}

3562: 

3563: \smallskip

3564: 2. Let us check \eqref{a5} for $n\geq1$. Denote the right-hand side

3565: of \eqref{a5} by

3566: $\tilde\psi_{n+1}^{R,*}(z)$. Similarly to the argument above, we find

3567: $$

3568: \psi_{n+1}^{R,*}(z)- \tilde \psi_{n+1}^{R,*}(z) = \int

3569: \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z} \, B_n(\theta,z) \, d\mu(\theta),

3570: $$

3571: where

3572: \begin{align*}

3573: B_n(\theta,z) & = z^{n+1}\varphi_{n+1}^R(1/\bar z)^\dagger -

3574: z^{n+1}\varphi_{n+1}^R(e^{i\theta})^\dagger \\

3575: & \qquad - (\rho_n^R)^{-1} [ z\alpha_n\varphi_n^L(e^{i\theta}) - z

3576: \alpha_n\varphi_n^L(z)

3577: +

3578: z^n\varphi_n^R(1/\bar z)^\dagger - z^n\varphi_n^R(e^{i\theta})^

3579: \dagger ] \\

3580: & = (\rho_n^R)^{-1} [ \varphi_n^{R,*}(z) - \alpha_n z \varphi_n^L(z) -

3581: z^{n+1}e^{-i(n+1)\theta}

3582: \varphi_n^{R,*}(e^{i\theta}) + z^{n+1}e^{-in\theta}\alpha_n

3583: \varphi_n^L(e^{i\theta}) \\

3584: & \qquad - z \alpha_n \varphi_n^L(e^{i\theta}) + z \alpha_n

3585: \varphi_n^L(z) -

3586: \varphi_n^{R,*}(z) +

3587: z^ne^{-in\theta} \varphi_n^{R,*}(e^{i\theta}) ] \\

3588: & = (\rho_n^R)^{-1} [ z \alpha_n (z^n e^{-in\theta}-1) \varphi_n^L(e^

3589: {i\theta}) + z^n

3590: e^{-in\theta}(1-ze^{-i\theta})\varphi_n^{R,*}(e^{i\theta}) ].

3591: \end{align*}

3592: Using the orthogonality relations \eqref{a6}, we get

3593: \begin{align*}

3594: \rho_n^R \int \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z} \, & B_n(\theta,z)

3595: \, d\mu(\theta) = \\

3596: & = z^{n+1}\int ( e^{-i(n+1)\theta}\varphi_n^{R,*}(e^{i\theta}) -

3597: \alpha_n

3598: e^{-in\theta}\varphi_n^{L}(e^{i\theta})) \, d\mu(\theta) \\

3599: & = z^{n+1}\rho_n^R \int e^{-i(n+1)\theta} \varphi_{n+1}^{R,*}(e^{i

3600: \theta}) \, d\mu(\theta) = \bdzero.

3601: \end{align*}

3602: 

3603: \smallskip

3604: 3. Relations \eqref{a4} and \eqref{a5} can be checked for $n=0$ by

3605: a direct substitution of \eqref{firstpoly1} and

3606: \eqref{firstpoly2}.

3607: 

3608: \smallskip

3609: 4. We obtain \eqref{a4r} and \eqref{a5r} from \eqref{a4} and \eqref

3610: {a5} by applying the

3611: $*$-operation.

3612: \end{proof}

3613: 

3614: Writing the above recursion in matrix form, we get

3615: $$

3616: \begin{pmatrix} \psi_{n+1}^L \\ \psi_{n+1}^{R,*} \end{pmatrix}

3617: = A^L(-\alpha_n,z) \begin{pmatrix} \psi_n^L \\ \psi_n^{R,*} \end

3618: {pmatrix}, \qquad

3619: \begin{pmatrix} \psi_0^L \\ \psi_0^{R,*} \end{pmatrix} =

3620: \begin{pmatrix} \bdone \\ \bdone \end{pmatrix}

3621: $$

3622: for left-orthogonal polynomials and

3623: $$

3624: \begin{pmatrix} \psi_{n+1}^R & \psi_{n+1}^{L,*} \end{pmatrix} =

3625: \begin{pmatrix} \psi_n^R & \psi_n^{L,*} \end{pmatrix} A^R(-\alpha_n,z),

3626: \qquad

3627: \begin{pmatrix} \psi_0^R & \psi_0^{L,*} \end{pmatrix} =

3628: \begin{pmatrix} \bdone & \bdone \end{pmatrix}.

3629: $$

3630: for right-orthogonal polynomials.

3631: 

3632: Equivalently,

3633: \begin{equation}

3634: \begin{pmatrix} \psi_{n+1}^L \\ - \psi_{n+1}^{R,*} \end{pmatrix}

3635: = A^L(\alpha_n,z) \begin{pmatrix} \psi_n^L \\ - \psi_n^{R,*} \end

3636: {pmatrix}, \qquad

3637: \begin{pmatrix} \psi_0^L \\ - \psi_0^{R,*} \end{pmatrix} =

3638: \begin{pmatrix} \bdone \\ - \bdone \end{pmatrix}

3639: \label{*2}

3640: \end{equation}

3641: and

3642: $$

3643: \begin{pmatrix} \psi_{n+1}^R & - \psi_{n+1}^{L,*} \end{pmatrix} =

3644: \begin{pmatrix} \psi_n^R & - \psi_n^{L,*} \end{pmatrix} A^R

3645: (\alpha_n,z), \qquad

3646: \begin{pmatrix} \psi_0^R & - \psi_0^{L,*} \end{pmatrix} =

3647: \begin{pmatrix} \bdone & - \bdone \end{pmatrix}.

3648: $$

3649: 

3650: In particular, we see that the second kind polynomials $\psi_n^{L,R}$

3651: correspond to

3652: Verblunsky coefficients $\{ - \alpha_n \}$. We have the following

3653: Wronskian-type relations:

3654: 

3655: \begin{proposition}

3656: For $n \ge 0$ and $z \in \C$, we have

3657: \begin{align}

3658: 2z^n \bdone & = \varphi_n^L(z) \psi_n^{L,*}(z) + \psi_n^L(z)

3659: \varphi_n^{L,*}(z), \label{wronsk1} \\

3660: 2z^n \bdone & = \psi_n^{R,*}(z) \varphi_n^R(z) + \varphi_n^{R,*}(z)

3661: \psi_n^R(z). \label{wronsk2} \\

3662: \bdzero & = \varphi_n^L(z) \psi_n^R(z) - \psi_n^L(z) \varphi_n^R(z),

3663: \label{wronsk3} \\

3664: \bdzero & = \psi_n^{R,*}(z) \varphi_n^{L,*}(z) - \varphi_n^{R,*}(z)

3665: \psi_n^{L,*}(z).

3666: \label{wronsk4}

3667: \end{align}

3668: \end{proposition}

3669: 

3670: \begin{proof}

3671: We prove this by induction. The four identities clearly hold for

3672: $n = 0$. Suppose \eqref{wronsk1}--\eqref{wronsk4} hold for some $n

3673: \ge 0$. Then,

3674: \begin{align*}

3675: \varphi_{n+1}^L \psi_{n+1}^{L,*} & + \psi_{n+1}^L \varphi_{n+1}^{L,*} =

3676: \\

3677: & =

3678: \left(\rho_n^L\right)^{-1} [(z \varphi_n^L - \alpha_n^\dagger

3679: \varphi_n^{R,*})

3680: (\psi_n^{L,*} + z \psi_n^R \alpha_n)

3681: \\

3682: & \qquad + (z\psi_n^L+\alpha_n^\dagger \psi_{n}^{R,*})

3683: (\varphi_n^{L,*} - z \varphi_n^R \alpha_n) ] \left(\rho_n^L\right)^{-1}

3684: \\

3685: & = \left(\rho_n^L\right)^{-1} [ z(\varphi_n^L \psi_n^{L,*} +

3686: \psi_n^L \varphi_n^{L,*}) -

3687: z \alpha_n^\dagger ( \psi_n^{R,*} \varphi_n^R + \varphi_n^{R,*}

3688: \psi_n^R )\alpha_n

3689: \\

3690: & \qquad + \alpha_n^\dagger ( \psi_n^{R,*} \varphi_n^{L,*} -

3691: \varphi_n^{R,*} \psi_n^{L,*}

3692: ) + z2 ( \varphi_n^L \psi_n^R - \psi_n^L \varphi_n^R ) \alpha_n ]

3693: \left(\rho_n^L\right)^{-1}

3694: \\

3695: & = \left(\rho_n^L\right)^{-1} [ 2z^{n+1} (\bdone - \alpha_n^\dagger

3696: \alpha_n) ]

3697: \left(\rho_n^L\right)^{-1} = 2z^{n+1} \bdone,

3698: \end{align*}

3699: where we used \eqref{wronsk1}--\eqref{wronsk4} for $n$ in the third

3700: step. Thus,

3701: \eqref{wronsk1} holds for $n+1$.

3702: 

3703: For \eqref{wronsk2}, we note that

3704: \begin{align*}

3705: \psi_{n+1}^{R,*} \varphi_{n+1}^R & + \varphi_{n+1}^{R,*} \psi_{n+1}^R =

3706: \\

3707: & = (\rho_n^R)^{-1} [

3708: (z\alpha_n \psi_{n}^L + \psi_{n}^{R,*}) (z \varphi_n^R - \varphi_n^{L,*}

3709: \alpha_n^\dagger)

3710: \\

3711: & \qquad + (\varphi_n^{R,*} - z \alpha_n \varphi_n^L)(z \psi_n^R+

3712: \psi_n^{L,*}

3713: \alpha_n^\dagger)]

3714: \left( \rho_n^R \right)^{-1}

3715: \\

3716: & = (\rho_n^R)^{-1} [ z (\psi_n^{R,*} \varphi_n^R + \varphi_n^{R,*}

3717: \psi_n^R) - z

3718: \alpha_n (\psi_n^L \varphi_n^{L,*} + \varphi_n^L \psi_n^{L,*})

3719: \alpha_n^\dagger

3720: \\

3721: & \qquad + z2 \alpha_n (\psi_n^L \varphi_n^R - \varphi_n^L \psi_n^R)

3722: - (\psi_n^{R,*}

3723: \varphi_n^{L,*} - \varphi_n^{R,*} \psi_n^{L,*}) \alpha_n^\dagger ]

3724: \left( \rho_n^R \right)^{-1}

3725: \\

3726: & = (\rho_n^R)^{-1} 2 z^{n+1}( \bdone - \alpha_n \alpha_n^\dagger )

3727: \left( \rho_n^R

3728: \right)^{-1} = 2z^{n+1} \bdone ,

3729: \end{align*}

3730: again using \eqref{wronsk1}--\eqref{wronsk4} for $n$ in the third step.

3731: 

3732: Next,

3733: \begin{align*}

3734: \varphi_{n+1}^L \psi_{n+1}^R & - \psi_{n+1}^L \varphi_{n+1}^R = \\

3735: & = (\rho_n^L)^{-1} [ (z

3736: \varphi_n^L - \alpha_n^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*}) (z\psi_n^R + \psi_n^

3737: {L,*} \alpha_n^\dagger) \\

3738: & \qquad - (z\psi_n^L + \alpha_n^\dagger \psi_n^{R,*}) (z\varphi_n^R

3739: - \varphi_n^{L,*}

3740: \alpha_n^\dagger) ] (\rho_n^R)^{-1} \\

3741: & = (\rho_n^L)^{-1} [ z2(\varphi_n^L \psi_n^R - \psi_n^L

3742: \varphi_n^R) - \alpha_n^\dagger

3743: (\varphi_n^{R,*} \psi_n^{L,*} - \psi_n^{R,*} \varphi_n^{L,*})

3744: \alpha_n^\dagger \\

3745: & \qquad - z \alpha_n^\dagger (\varphi_n^{R,*} \psi_n^R + \psi_n^

3746: {R,*} \varphi_n^R) + z

3747: (\varphi_n^L \psi_n^{L,*} + \psi_n^L \varphi_n^{L,*}) \alpha_n^

3748: \dagger ] (\rho_n^R)^{-1}

3749: \\

3750: &= \bdzero

3751: \end{align*}

3752: which implies first \eqref{wronsk3} for $n+1$ and then, by applying

3753: the $*$-operation of

3754: order $2n+2$, also \eqref{wronsk4} for $n+1$. This concludes the

3755: proof of the

3756: proposition.

3757: \end{proof}

3758: 

3759: \subsection{Christoffel--Darboux Formulas} \lb{s3.3A}

3760: 

3761: \begin{proposition} \lb{P3.6}

3762: {\rm (a) (CD)-left orthogonal}

3763: \begin{align*}

3764: (1 - \bar \xi z) \sum_{k = 0}^n \varphi_k^L (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_k^L

3765: (z)

3766: & = \varphi_n^{R,*} (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*} (z) - \bar \xi z

3767: \varphi_n^L (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^L (z)

3768: \\

3769: & = \varphi_{n+1}^{R,*} (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_{n+1}^{R,*} (z) -

3770: \varphi_{n+1}^L (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_{n+1}^L (z).

3771: \end{align*}

3772: {\rm (b) (CD)-right orthogonal}

3773: \begin{align*}

3774: (1 - \bar \xi z) \sum_{k = 0}^n \varphi_k^R (z) \varphi_k^R (\xi)^

3775: \dagger

3776: & = \varphi_n^{L,*} (z) \varphi_n^{L,*} (\xi)^\dagger - \bar \xi z

3777: \varphi_n^R (z) \varphi_n^R (\xi)^\dagger \\

3778: & = \varphi_{n+1}^{L,*} (z) \varphi_{n+1}^{L,*} (\xi)^\dagger -

3779: \varphi_{n+1}^R (z) \varphi_{n+1}^R (\xi)^\dagger.

3780: \end{align*}

3781: {\rm (c) (Mixed CD)-left orthogonal}

3782: \begin{align*}

3783: (1 - \bar \xi z) \sum_{k = 0}^n \psi_k^L (\xi)^\dagger

3784: \varphi_k^L (z) & = 2\cdot \bdone - \psi_n^{R,*} (\xi)^\dagger

3785: \varphi_n^{R,*} (z) - \bar \xi z

3786: \psi_n^L (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^L (z) \\

3787: & = 2\cdot \bdone - \psi_{n+1}^{R,*} (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_{n+1}^

3788: {R,*} (z) -

3789: \psi_{n+1}^L (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_{n+1}^L (z).

3790: \end{align*}

3791: {\rm (d) (Mixed CD)-right orthogonal}

3792: \begin{align*}

3793: (1 - \bar \xi z) \sum_{k = 0}^n \varphi_k^R (z) \psi_k^R (\xi)^

3794: \dagger & =

3795: 2\cdot\bdone - \varphi_n^{L,*} (z) \psi_n^{L,*} (\xi)^\dagger - \bar

3796: \xi z

3797: \varphi_n^R (z) \psi_n^R (\xi)^\dagger \\

3798: & = 2\cdot\bdone - \varphi_{n+1}^{L,*} (z) \psi_{n+1}^{L,*} (\xi)^

3799: \dagger -

3800: \varphi_{n+1}^R (z) \psi_{n+1}^R (\xi)^\dagger.

3801: \end{align*}

3802: \end{proposition}

3803: 

3804: \begin{remark} Since the $\psi$'s are themselves MOPUCs, the analogue of

3805: (a) and (b), with all $\varphi$'s replaced by $\psi$'s, holds.

3806: \end{remark}

3807: 

3808: \begin{proof}

3809: (a) Write

3810: $$

3811: F^L_n(z) = \begin{pmatrix} \varphi_n^L(z) \\

3812: \varphi_n^{R,*}(z)\end {pmatrix}, \quad J = \left(

3813: \begin{array}{rr} \bdone & \bdzero \\ \bdzero & -\bdone

3814: \end{array} \right), \quad

3815: \tilde J  = \left( \begin{array}{cr} \bar \xi z \bdone & \bdzero \\

3816: \bdzero & -\bdone

3817: \end{array} \right).

3818: $$

3819: Then,

3820: $$

3821: F^L_{n+1}(z) = A^L (\alpha_n,z) F^L_n(z)

3822: $$

3823: and

3824: \begin{align*}

3825: A^L (\alpha,\xi)^\dagger & J A^L(\alpha,z) = \\

3826: & = \begin{pmatrix} \bar \xi (\rho^L)^{-1} & - \bar \xi \alpha^

3827: \dagger (\rho^R)^{-1} \\

3828: -\alpha (\rho^L)^{-1} & (\rho^R)^{-1} \end{pmatrix}

3829: \begin{pmatrix} z (\rho^L)^{-1} & - (\rho^L)^{-1} \alpha^\dagger \\

3830: z (\rho^R)^{-1} \alpha & - (\rho^R)^{-1} \end{pmatrix} \\

3831: & = \begin{pmatrix} \bar \xi z (\rho^L)^{-2} - \bar \xi z

3832: \alpha^\dagger (\rho^R)^{-2} \alpha & - \bar \xi (\rho^L)^{-2}

3833: \alpha^\dagger + \bar \xi \alpha^\dagger (\rho^R)^{-2} \\

3834: - z \alpha (\rho^L)^{-2} + z (\rho^R)^{-2} \alpha & \alpha

3835: (\rho^L)^{-2} \alpha^\dagger - (\rho^R)^{-2} \end{pmatrix} \\

3836: & = \begin{pmatrix} \bar \xi z \bdone & \bdzero \\ \bdzero & - \bdone

3837: \end{pmatrix}

3838: = \tilde J .

3839: \end{align*}

3840: Thus,

3841: \begin{align*}

3842: F^L_{n+1}(\xi)^\dagger J F^L_{n+1}(z) &=  F^L_n(\xi)^\dagger A^L

3843: (\alpha_n,\xi)^\dagger J A^L

3844: (\alpha_n,z) F^L_n(z) \\

3845: &= F^L_n(\xi)^\dagger \tilde J F^L_n(z)

3846: \end{align*}

3847: and hence

3848: $$

3849: \varphi_{n+1}^L(\xi)^\dagger \varphi_{n+1}^L(z) - \varphi_{n+1}^{R,*}

3850: (\xi)^\dagger

3851: \varphi_{n+1}^{R,*}(z) = \bar \xi z \varphi_n^L(\xi)^\dagger

3852: \varphi_n^L(z) -

3853: \varphi_n^{R,*}(\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*}(z)

3854: $$

3855: which shows that the last two expressions in (a) are equal. Denote

3856: their common value by

3857: $Q^L_n(z,\xi)$. Then,

3858: \begin{align*}

3859: Q^L_n  (z,\xi) - Q^L_{n-1}(z,\xi) & =

3860:     \varphi_n^{R,*} (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*} (z) - \bar \xi z

3861: \varphi_n^L (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^L (z) \\

3862: & \qquad - \varphi_n^{R,*} (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*} (z) +

3863: \varphi_n^L (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^L (z) \\

3864: & = (1 - \bar \xi z) \varphi_n^L (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^L (z).

3865: \end{align*}

3866: Summing over $n$ completes the proof since $Q^L_{-1}(z,\xi)=0$.

3867: 

3868: \smallskip

3869: (b) The proof is analogous to (a): Write $F^R_n(z) = \left(

3870: \varphi_n^R(z) \quad  \varphi_n^{L,*}(z) \right)$. Then,

3871: $F^R_{n+1}(z) = F^R_n(z) A^R(\alpha_n,z)$ and $A^R (\alpha,z) J

3872: A^R (\alpha,\xi)^ \dagger = \tilde J$. Thus,

3873: \begin{align*}

3874: F^R_{n+1}(z) J F^R_{n+1}(\xi)^\dagger & = F^R_n(z) A^R(\alpha_n,z)

3875: J A^R (\alpha_n,\xi)^\dagger F^R_n

3876: (\xi)^\dagger \\

3877: &= F^R_n(z) \tilde J F^R_n(\xi)^\dagger

3878: \end{align*}

3879: and hence

3880: $$

3881: \varphi_{n+1}^R(z) \varphi_{n+1}^R(\xi)^\dagger - \varphi_{n+1}^{L,*}(z)

3882: \varphi_{n+1}^{L,*}(\xi)^\dagger = \bar \xi z \varphi_n^R(z)

3883: \varphi_n^R(\xi)^\dagger -

3884: \varphi_n^{L,*}(z) \varphi_n^{L,*}(\xi)^\dagger

3885: $$

3886: which shows that the last two expressions in (b) are equal. Denote

3887: their common value by $Q^R_n(z,\xi)$. Then,

3888: $$

3889: Q^R_n (z,\xi) - Q^R_{n-1}(z,\xi) = (1 - \bar \xi z) \varphi_n^R

3890: (z) \varphi_n^R (\xi)^\dagger

3891: $$

3892: and the assertion follows as before.

3893: 

3894: \smallskip

3895: (c) Write

3896: $$

3897: \tilde F^L_n(z) =  \begin{pmatrix} \psi_n^L(z) \\ -

3898: \psi_n^{R,*}(z)

3899: \end{pmatrix}

3900: $$

3901: with the second kind polynomials $\psi_n^{L,R}$. As in (a), we see

3902: that

3903: \begin{align*}

3904: \tilde F^L_{n+1}(\xi)^\dagger J F^L_{n+1}(z) &=  \tilde

3905: F^L_n(\xi)^\dagger A^L(\alpha_n,\xi)^\dagger J A^L

3906: (\alpha_n,z) F^L_n(z) \\

3907: & = \tilde F^L_n(\xi)^\dagger \tilde J F^L_n(z)

3908: \end{align*}

3909: and hence

3910: $$

3911: \psi_{n+1}^L(\xi)^\dagger \varphi_{n+1}^L(z) + \psi_{n+1}^{R,*}(\xi)^

3912: \dagger

3913: \varphi_{n+1}^{R,*}(z) = \bar \xi z \psi_n^L(\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^L

3914: (z) +

3915: \psi_n^{R,*}(\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*}(z).

3916: $$

3917: Denote

3918: $$

3919: \tilde Q^L_n(z,\xi) = 2\cdot \bdone - \psi_{n+1}^{R,*}(\xi)^\dagger

3920: \varphi_{n+1}^{R,*}(z) -

3921: \psi_{n+1}^L(\xi)^\dagger \varphi_{n+1}^L(z).

3922: $$

3923: Then,

3924: \begin{align*}

3925: \tilde Q^L_n  (z,\xi) - \tilde Q^L_{n-1}(z,\xi)

3926: & = - \psi_n^{R,*} (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*} (z) - \bar \xi z

3927: \psi_n^L (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^L (z)\\

3928: & \qquad  + \psi_n^{R,*} (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*} (z) + \psi_n^L

3929: (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^L (z) \\

3930: & = (1 - \bar \xi z) \psi_n^L (\xi)^\dagger \varphi_n^L (z)

3931: \end{align*}

3932: and the assertion follows as before.

3933: 

3934: \smallskip

3935: (d) Write $\tilde F^R_n(z) = \left(  \psi_n^R(z) \quad -

3936: \psi_n^{L,*}(z) \right)$. As in (b), we see that

3937: \begin{align*}

3938: F^R_{n+1}(z) J \tilde F^R_{n+1}(\xi)^\dagger &= F^R_n(z)

3939: A^R(\alpha_n,z) J A^R(\alpha_n,\xi)^\dagger \tilde

3940: F^R_n(\xi)^\dagger \\

3941: &= F^R_n(z) \tilde J \tilde F^R_n(\xi)^\dagger

3942: \end{align*}

3943: and hence

3944: $$

3945: \varphi_{n+1}^R(z) \psi_{n+1}^R(\xi)^\dagger + \varphi_{n+1}^{L,*}(z)

3946: \psi_{n+1}^{L,*}(\xi)^\dagger = \bar \xi z \varphi_n^R(z) \psi_n^R

3947: (\xi)^\dagger +

3948: \varphi_n^{L,*}(z) \psi_n^{L,*}(\xi)^\dagger.

3949: $$

3950: With $\tilde Q^R_n(z,\xi) = 2\cdot\bdone - \varphi_{n+1}^{L,*}(z)

3951: \psi_{n +1}^{L,*}(\xi)^\dagger - \varphi_{n+1}^R(z)

3952: \psi_{n+1}^R(\xi)^\dagger$, we have

3953: $$

3954: \tilde Q^R_n (z,\xi) - \tilde Q^R_{n-1}(z,\xi) = (1 - \bar \xi z)

3955: \varphi_n^R (z)

3956: \psi_n^R (\xi)^\dagger

3957: $$

3958: and we conclude as in (c).

3959: \end{proof}

3960: 

3961: \subsection{Zeros of MOPUC} \lb{s3.3B}

3962: 

3963: Our main result in this section is:

3964: 

3965: \begin{theorem}\lb{T3.6A} All the zeros of $\det(\varphi_n^R(z))$ lie

3966: in $\bbD=

3967: \{z\, \colon \abs{z}<1\}$.

3968: \end{theorem}

3969: 

3970: We will also prove:

3971: 

3972: \begin{theorem}\lb{T3.6B} For each $n$,

3973: \begin{equation}\lb{3.24a}

3974: \det(\varphi_n^R(z))=\det(\varphi_n^L(z)).

3975: \end{equation}

3976: \end{theorem}

3977: 

3978: The scalar analogue of Theorem~\ref{T3.6A} has seven proofs in \cite

3979: {S}! The simplest is due to

3980: Landau \cite{Landau} and its MOPUC analogue is Theorem~2.13.7 of \cite

3981: {S}. There is also a proof

3982: in Delsarte et al.\ \cite{DGK} who attribute the theorem to Whittle

3983: \cite{Whit}.  We provide two

3984: more proofs here, not only for their intrinsic interest: our first

3985: proof we need because it

3986: depends only on the recursion relation (it is related to the proof of

3987: Delsarte et al.\ \cite{DGK}).

3988: The second proof is here since it relates zeros to eigenvalues of a

3989: cutoff CMV matrix.

3990: 

3991: \begin{theorem}\lb{T3.6C} We have

3992: \begin{SL}

3993: \item[{\rm{(i)}}] For $z\in\partial\bbD$, all of $\varphi_n^{R,*}(z)

3994: $, $\varphi_n^{L,*}(z)$, $\varphi_n^R(z)$,

3995: $\varphi_n^L(z)$ are invertible.

3996: 

3997: \item[{\rm{(ii)}}] For $z\in\partial\bbD$, $\varphi_n^L(z) (\varphi_n^

3998: {R,*}(z))^{-1}$ and $(\varphi_n^{*,L}(z))^{-1}

3999: \varphi_n^R(z)$ are unitary.

4000: 

4001: \item[{\rm{(iii)}}] For $z\in\bbD$, $\varphi_n^{R,*}(z)$ and

4002: $\varphi_n^{L,*}(z)$ are invertible.

4003: 

4004: \item[{\rm{(iv)}}] For $z\in\bbD$, $\varphi_n^L(z)(\varphi_n^{R,*}(z))

4005: ^{-1}$ and $(\varphi_n^{*,L}(z))^{-1}

4006: \varphi_n^R(z)$ are of norm at most $1$ and, for $n\geq 1$, strictly

4007: less than $1$.

4008: 

4009: \item[{\rm{(v)}}] All zeros of $\det(\varphi_n^{R,*}(z))$ and $\det

4010: (\varphi_n^{L,*}(z))$ lie in $\bbC\setminus

4011: \ol{\bbD}$.

4012: 

4013: \item[{\rm{(vi)}}] All zeros of $\det(\varphi_n^R(z))$ and $\det

4014: (\varphi_n^L(z))$ lie in $\bbD$.

4015: \end{SL}

4016: \end{theorem}

4017: 

4018: \begin{remark} (vi) is our first proof of Theorem~\ref{T3.6A}.

4019: \end{remark}

4020: 

4021: \begin{proof} All these results are trivial for $n=0$, so we can hope

4022: to use an inductive argument. So  suppose we have the result for

4023: $n -1$.

4024: 

4025: By \eqref{3.7b},

4026: \begin{equation}\lb{3.24b}

4027: \varphi_n^{R,*} = (\rho_{n-1}^R)^{-1} (\bdone

4028: -z\alpha_{n-1}\varphi_{n-1}^L (\varphi_{n-1}^{R,*})^{-1})

4029: \varphi_{n-1}^{R,*}.

4030: \end{equation}

4031: Since $\abs{\alpha_{n-1}}<1$, if $\abs{z}\leq 1$, each factor on the

4032: right of \eqref{3.24b} is invertible.

4033: This proves (i) and (iii) for $\varphi_n^{R,*}$ and a similar

4034: argument works for $\varphi_n^{L,*}$. If

4035: $z=e^{i\theta}$, $\varphi_n^R (e^{i\theta})=e^{in\theta}\varphi_n^

4036: {R,*} (e^{i\theta})^\dagger$ is also

4037: invertible, so we have (i) and (iii) for $n$.

4038: 

4039: Next, we claim that if $z\in\partial\bbD$, then

4040: \begin{equation}\lb{3.24c}

4041: \varphi_n^{R,*}(z)^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*}(z) =\varphi_n^L(z)^\dagger

4042: \varphi_n^L(z).

4043: \end{equation}

4044: This follows from taking $z=\xi\in\partial\bbD$ in Proposition~\ref

4045: {P3.6}(a). Given that

4046: $\varphi_n^{R,*}(z)$ is invertible, this implies

4047: \begin{equation}\lb{3.24d}

4048: \bdone =(\varphi_n^L(z) \varphi_n^{R,*}(z)^{-1})^\dagger (\varphi_n^L

4049: (z) \varphi_n^{R,*}(z)^{-1})

4050: \end{equation}

4051: proving the first part of (ii) for $n$. The second part of (ii) is

4052: proven similarly by using Proposition~\ref{P3.6}(b).

4053: 

4054: For $z\in\ol{\bbD}$, let

4055: \[

4056: F(z)=\varphi_n^L(z) \varphi_n^{R,*}(z)^{-1}.

4057: \]

4058: Then $F$ is analytic in $\bbD$, continuous in $\ol{\bbD}$, and $\norm

4059: {F(z)}=1$ on $\partial\bbD$,

4060: so (iv) follows from the maximum principle.

4061: 

4062: Since $\varphi_n^{R,*}(z)$ is invertible on $\ol{\bbD}$, its $\det$

4063: is non-zero there, proving (v).

4064: (vi) then follows from

4065: \begin{equation}\lb{3.24e}

4066: \det(\varphi_n^R(z)) =z^{nl}\, \ol{\det(\varphi_n^{R,*}(1/\bar z))}\, .

4067: \end{equation}

4068: \end{proof}

4069: 

4070: Let $\calV$ be the $\bbC^l$-valued functions on $\partial\bbD$ and

4071: $\calV_n$ the span of the $\bbC^l$-valued polynomials of degree at

4072: most $n$, so

4073: \[

4074: \dim(\calV_n)=\bbC^{l(n+1)}.

4075: \]

4076: Let $\calV_\infty$ be the set $\cup_n \calV_n$ of all

4077: $\bbC^l$-valued polynomials. Let $\pi_n$ be the projection onto

4078: $\calV_n$ in the $\calV$ inner product \eqref {1.33}.

4079: 

4080: It is easy to see that

4081: \begin{equation}\lb{3.24f}

4082: \calV_n \cap \calV_{n-1}^\perp = \{\Phi_n^R(z) v\, \colon v\in\bbC^l\}

4083: \end{equation}

4084: since $\jap{z^l, \Phi_n^R(z) v} =0$ for $l=0,\dots, n-1$ and the

4085: dimensions  on the left and right of \eqref{3.24f} coincide.

4086: $\calV_n \cap \calV_{n-1}^\perp $ can also be described as the set

4087: of $(v^\dagger \Phi_n^L(z))^\dagger$ for $v\in\bbC^l$.

4088: 

4089: We define $M_z \colon \calV_{n-1} \to \calV_n$ or $\calV_\infty

4090: \to \calV_\infty$ as the operator of multiplication by $z$.

4091: 

4092: \begin{theorem}\lb{T3.6D} For all $n$, we have

4093: \begin{equation}\lb{3.24g}

4094: \det_{\bbC^l} (\Phi_n^R(z)) =\det_{\calV_{n-1}} (z\bdone-\pi_{n-1}

4095: M_z \pi_{n-1}).

4096: \end{equation}

4097: \end{theorem}

4098: 

4099: \begin{remarks} 1. Since $\norm{M_z}\leq 1$, \eqref{3.24g}

4100: immediately implies zeros of $\det(\varphi_n^R(z))$

4101: lie in $\ol{\bbD}$, and a small additional argument proves they lie

4102: in $\bbD$. As we will see, this also

4103: implies Theorem~\ref{T3.6B}.

4104: 

4105: \smallskip

4106: 2. Of course, $\pi_{n-1} M_z \pi_{n-1}$ is a cutoff CMV matrix if

4107: written in a CMV basis.

4108: \end{remarks}

4109: 

4110: \begin{proof} If $Q\in \calV_{n-k}$, then by \eqref{3.24f},

4111: \begin{equation}\lb{3.24h}

4112: \pi_{n-1}[(z-z_0)^k Q] = 0 \Leftrightarrow (z-z_0)^k Q=\Phi_n^R(z) v

4113: \end{equation}

4114: for some $v\in\bbC^l$. Thus writing $\det(\Phi_n^R(z)) =\Phi_n^R(z)

4115: v_1 \wedge \dots \wedge

4116: \Phi_n^R(z) v_l$ in a Jordan basis for $\Phi_n^R(z)$, we see that the

4117: order of the zeros of

4118: $\det(\Phi_n^R(z))$ at $z_0$ is exactly the order of $z_0$ as an

4119: algebraic eigenvalue of

4120: $\pi_{n-1} M_z \pi_{n-1}$, that is, the order of $z_0$ as a zero of

4121: the right side of \eqref{3.24g}.

4122: 

4123: Since both sides of \eqref{3.24g} are monic polynomials of degree $nl

4124: $ and their zeros including

4125: multiplicity are the same, we have proven \eqref{3.24g}.

4126: \end{proof}

4127: 

4128: \begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{T3.6B}] On the right side of

4129: \eqref{3.24h}, we can put $(\Phi_n^L(z) v^\dagger)^\dagger$ and so

4130: conclude \eqref{3.24g} holds with $\Phi_n^L(z)$ on the left.

4131: 

4132: This proves \eqref{3.24a} if $\varphi$ is replaced by $\Phi$. Since

4133: $\alpha_j^*\alpha_j$ and $\alpha_j\alpha_j^*$ are unitarily equivalent,

4134: $\det(\rho_j^L)=\det (\rho_j^R)$. Thus, $\det(\kappa_n^L) = \det

4135: (\kappa_n^R)$,

4136: and we obtain \eqref{3.24a} for $\varphi$.

4137: \end{proof}

4138: 

4139: It is a basic fact (Theorem~1.7.5 of \cite{S}) that for the scalar

4140: case, any set of $n$ zeros in $\bbD$ are the zeros of a unique

4141: OPUC $\Phi_n$ and any monic polynomial with all its zeros in

4142: $\bbD$ is a monic OPUC. It is easy to see that any set of $nl$

4143: zeros in $\bbD$ is the set of zeros of an OPUC $\Phi_n$, but

4144: certainly not unique. It is an interesting open question to

4145: clarify what matrix monic OPs are monic MOPUCs.

4146: 

4147: \subsection{Bernstein--Szeg\H{o} Approximation} \lb{s3.5A}

4148: 

4149: Given $\{\alpha_j\}_{j=0}^{n-1}\in\bbD^n$, we use Szeg\H{o} recursion

4150: to define polynomials

4151: $\varphi_j^R, \varphi_j^L$ for $j=0,1,\dots, n$. We define a measure

4152: $d\mu_n$ on $\partial\bbD$

4153: by

4154: \begin{equation}\lb{3.32a}

4155: d\mu_n(\theta) = [\varphi_n^R(e^{i\theta})\varphi_n^R (e^{i\theta})^

4156: \dagger]^{-1}

4157: \, \f{d\theta}{2\pi}.

4158: \end{equation}

4159: Notice that \eqref{3.24c} can be rewritten

4160: \begin{equation}\lb{3.32b}

4161: \varphi_n^R(e^{i\theta}) \varphi_n^R(e^{i\theta})^\dagger =

4162: \varphi_n^L (e^{i\theta})^\dagger

4163: \varphi_n^L (e^{i\theta}).

4164: \end{equation}

4165: 

4166: We use here and below the fact that the proof of

4167: Theorem~\ref{T3.6C} only depends on Szeg\H{o} recursion and not on

4168: the a priori existence of a measure. That theorem also shows the

4169: inverse in \eqref{3.32a} exists. Thus,

4170: \begin{equation}\lb{3.32c}

4171: d\mu_n(\theta)= [\varphi_n^L (e^{i\theta})^\dagger \varphi_n^L (e^{i

4172: \theta})]^{-1} \, \f{d\theta}{2\pi}\, .

4173: \end{equation}

4174: 

4175: \begin{theorem} \lb{T3.10A} The measure $d\mu_n$ is normalized

4176: {\rm{(}}i.e., $\mu_n(\partial \bbD)=\bdone${\rm{)}}

4177: and its right MOPUC for $j=0,\dots, n$ are

4178: $\{\varphi_j^R\}_{j=0}^n$, and for $j>n$,

4179: \begin{equation}\lb{3.32d}

4180: \varphi_j^R(z) = z^{j-n} \varphi_n^R(z).

4181: \end{equation}

4182: The Verblunsky coefficients for $d\mu_n$ are

4183: \begin{equation}\lb{3.32e}

4184: \alpha_j (d\mu_n) = \begin{cases} \alpha_j, & j\leq n, \\

4185: \bdzero, & j\geq n+1.

4186: \end{cases}

4187: \end{equation}

4188: \end{theorem}

4189: 

4190: \begin{remarks} 1. In the scalar case, one can multiply by a constant

4191: and renormalize, and then

4192: prove the constant is $1$. Because of commutativity issues, we need a

4193: different argument here.

4194: 

4195: \smallskip

4196: 2. Of course, using \eqref{3.32c}, $\varphi_n^L$ are left MOPUC for $d

4197: \mu_n$.

4198: 

4199: \smallskip

4200: 3. Our proof owes something to the scalar proof in \cite{ENZG91}.

4201: \end{remarks}

4202: 

4203: \begin{proof}

4204: Let $\ang{\cdot,\cdot}_R$ be the inner product associated with $

4205: \mu_n$. By a direct computation, $\ang{\varphi_n^R, \varphi_n^R}_R

4206: =\bdone$, and for $j=0,1,\dots, n-1$,

4207: \begin{align*}

4208: \ang{z^j, \varphi_n^R}_R &= \f{1}{2\pi} \int_0^{2\pi} e^{-ij\theta}

4209: (\varphi_n^R (e^{i\theta})^\dagger)^{-1}\, d\theta \\

4210: &= \f{1}{2\pi i} \oint z^{n-j-1} (\varphi_n^{R,*}(z))^{-1} \, dz =

4211: \bdzero

4212: \end{align*}

4213: by analyticity of $\varphi_n^{R,*}(z)^{-1}$ in $\bbD$ (continuity

4214: in $\ol{\bbD}$).

4215: 

4216: This proves $\varphi_n^R$ is a MOPUC for $d\mu_n$ (and a similar

4217: calculation works for the right side of \eqref{3.32d} if $j\geq

4218: n$). By the inverse Szeg\H{o} recursion and induction downwards,

4219: $\{\varphi_j^R\}_{j=0}^{n-1}$ are also OPs, and by the Szeg\H{o}

4220: recursion, they are normalized. In particular, since

4221: $\varphi_0^R\equiv\bdone$ is normalized, $d\mu_n$ is normalized.

4222: \end{proof}

4223: 

4224: \subsection{Verblunsky's Theorem}\lb{s3.5B}

4225: 

4226: We can now prove the analogue of Favard's theorem for MOPUC; the

4227: scalar version is called Verblunsky's

4228: theorem in \cite{S} after \cite{V35}. A history and other proofs can

4229: be found in \cite{S}. The proof

4230: below is essentially the matrix analogue of that of Geronimus \cite

4231: {Ger46}

4232: (rediscovered in \cite{DGK,ENZG91}).

4233: Delsarte et al. \cite{DGK} presented their proof in the MOPUC case

4234: and they seem to have been the first

4235: with a matrix Verblunsky theorem. One can extend the CMV and the

4236: Geronimus theorem proofs from the scalar

4237: case to get alternate proofs of the theorem below.

4238: 

4239: \begin{theorem}[Verblunsky's Theorem for MOPUC]\lb{T3.10B}

4240: Any sequence $\{\alpha_j\}_{j=0}^\infty \in\bbD^\infty$ is the sequence of

4241: Verblunsky coefficients of a unique measure.

4242: \end{theorem}

4243: 

4244: \begin{proof} Uniqueness is easy, since the $\alpha$'s determine the $

4245: \varphi_j^R$'s and so the

4246: $\Phi_j^R$'s which determine the moments.

4247: 

4248: Given a sequence $\{\alpha_j\}_{j=0}^\infty$, let $d\mu_n$ be the

4249: measures of the last section. By

4250: compactness of $l\times l$ matrix-valued probability measures on

4251: $\partial\bbD$, they have a weak limit. By

4252: using limits, $\{\varphi_j^R\}_{j=0}^\infty$ are the right MOPUC for

4253: $d\mu$ and they determine

4254: the proper Verblunsky coefficients.

4255: \end{proof}

4256: 

4257: \subsection{Matrix POPUC}\lb{s3.5C}

4258: 

4259: Analogously to the scalar case (see \cite

4260: {CMV02,Gol02,JNT89,S308,Wong}), given any unitary $\beta$

4261: in $\calM_l$, we define

4262: \begin{equation}\lb{3.32f}

4263: \varphi_n^R(z;\beta) = z\varphi_{n-1}^R(z) -\varphi_{n-1}^{L,*}(z)

4264: \beta^\dagger.

4265: \end{equation}

4266: As in the scalar case, this is related to the secular determinant of

4267: unitary extensions of the

4268: cutoff CMV matrix. Moreover,

4269: 

4270: \begin{theorem}\lb{T3.10C} Fix $\beta$. All the zeros of $(\varphi_n

4271: (z;\beta))$ lie on $\partial\bbD$.

4272: \end{theorem}

4273: 

4274: \begin{proof} If $\abs{z}<1$, $\varphi_{n-1}^{L,*}(z)$ is invertible and

4275: \[

4276: \varphi_n^R(z;\beta) = -\varphi_{n-1}^{L,*}(z) \beta^\dagger (\bdone -

4277: z\beta \,

4278: \varphi_{n-1}^{L,*}(z)^{-1} \varphi_{n-1}^R(z))

4279: \]

4280: is invertible since the last factor differs from $\bdone$ by a strict

4281: contraction. A similar argument

4282: shows invertibility if $\abs{z}>1$. Thus, the only zeros of $\det

4283: (\dott)$ lie in $\partial\bbD$.

4284: \end{proof}

4285: 

4286: 

4287: 

4288: \subsection{Matrix-Valued Carath\'eodory and Schur Functions}

4289: 

4290: An analytic matrix-valued function $F$ defined on $\D$ is called a

4291: (matrix-valued)

4292: Carath\'eodory function if $F(0) = \bdone$ and $\mathrm{Re} \, F(z)

4293: \equiv \f12 (F(z)+F(z)^\dagger)

4294: \ge 0$ for every $z \in\D$. The following result can be found in \cite[Thm.~2.2.2]{DFK}.

4295: 

4296: \begin{theorem}[Riesz--Herglotz]

4297: If $F$ is a matrix-valued Carath\'eodory function, then there

4298: exists a unique positive semi-definite matrix measure $d\mu$ such

4299: that

4300: \begin{equation}\label{rep}

4301: F(z) = \int \frac{e^{i\theta} + z}{e^{i\theta} - z} \, d\mu(\theta).

4302: \end{equation}

4303: The measure $d\mu$ is given by the unique weak limit of the measures

4304: $d\mu_r(\theta) =

4305: \mathrm{Re} \, F(re^{i\theta}) \f{d\theta}{2\pi}$ as $r \uparrow 1$.

4306: Moreover,

4307: $$

4308: F(z) = c_0 + 2 \sum_{n=1}^\infty c_n z^n

4309: $$

4310: where

4311: $$

4312: c_n = \int e^{-in\theta} \, d\mu(\theta).

4313: $$

4314: Conversely, if $d\mu$ is a positive semi-definite matrix measure,

4315: then \eqref{rep} defines a matrix-valued Carath\'eodory function.

4316: \end{theorem}

4317: 

4318: An analytic matrix-valued function $f$ defined on $\D$ is called a

4319: (matrix-valued) Schur

4320: function if $f(z)^\dagger f(z) \le \bdone$ for every $z \in \D$. This

4321: condition is equivalent

4322: to $f(z) f(z)^\dagger \le \bdone$ for every $z \in \D$ and to $\norm{f

4323: (z)}\leq 1$ for every $z\in

4324: \bbD$. By the maximum principle, if $f$ is not constant, the

4325: inequalities are strict.

4326: The following can be found in \cite[Prop.~4.5.3]{S}:

4327: 

4328: \begin{proposition}

4329: The association

4330: \begin{align}

4331: f(z) & = z^{-1} (F(z) - \bdone)(F(z) + \bdone)^{-1}, \label{Ff}\\

4332: F(z) & = (\bdone + zf(z))(\bdone - zf(z))^{-1} \label{fF}

4333: \end{align}

4334: sets up a one-one correspondence between matrix-valued Carath\'eodory

4335: functions and

4336: matrix-valued Schur functions.

4337: \end{proposition}

4338: 

4339: 

4340: \begin{proposition}\label{prop.3.16}

4341: For $z \in \D$, we have

4342: \begin{equation}\label{ReFfromf}

4343: \mathrm{Re} \, F(z) = (\bdone - \bar z f(z)^\dagger)^{-1} (\bdone - |

4344: z|^2 f(z)^\dagger f(z))

4345: (\bdone - z f(z))^{-1}

4346: \end{equation}

4347: and the non-tangential boundary values $\mathrm{Re} \, F(e^{i\theta})

4348: $ and

4349: $f(e^{i\theta})$ exist for Lebesgue almost every $\theta$.

4350: 

4351: Write $d\mu(\theta) = w(\theta) \frac{d\theta}{2\pi} + d\mu_\s$.

4352: Then, for

4353: almost every $\theta$,

4354: \begin{equation}\label{wandReF}

4355: w(\theta) = \mathrm{Re} \, F(e^{i\theta})

4356: \end{equation}

4357: and for a.e.\ $\theta$, $\det (w(\theta)) \not= 0$ if and only if $f

4358: (e^{i\theta})^\dagger

4359: f(e^{i\theta}) < \bdone$.

4360: \end{proposition}

4361: 

4362: \begin{proof}

4363: The identity \eqref{ReFfromf} follows from \eqref{fF}. The

4364: existence of the boundary values of $f$ follows by application of

4365: the scalar result to the individual entries of $f$. Then

4366: \eqref{fF} gives the boundary values of $F$. We also used the

4367: following fact: Away from a set of zero Lebesgue measure, $\det

4368: (\bdone - z f(z))$ has non-zero boundary values by general

4369: $H^\infty$ theory.

4370: 

4371: \eqref{wandReF} holds for $\jap{\eta, F(z)\eta}_{\C^l}$ and $\jap

4372: {\eta,d\mu\eta}_{\C^l}$ for any $\eta\in\bbC^l$ by the scalar

4373: result. We get \eqref{wandReF} by polarization. From

4374: $$

4375: w(\theta) = (\bdone - e^{-i\theta} f(e^{i\theta})^\dagger)^{-1}

4376: (\bdone - f(e^{i\theta})^\dagger

4377: f(e^{i\theta})) (\bdone - e^{i\theta} f(e^{i\theta}))^{-1}

4378: $$

4379: it follows immediately that $f(e^{i\theta})^\dagger f(e^{i\theta}) <

4380: \bdone$ implies $\det

4381: (w(\theta)) > 0$. Conversely, if $f(e^{i\theta})^\dagger f(e^{i

4382: \theta}) \le \bdone$ but not

4383: $f(e^{i\theta})^\dagger f(e^{i\theta}) < 1$, then $\det (\bdone - f(e^

4384: {i\theta})^\dagger

4385: f(e^{i\theta})) = 0$ and by our earlier arguments $\det (\bdone - e^{-

4386: i\theta}

4387: f(e^{i\theta})^\dagger)^{-1}$ and $\det (\bdone - e^{i\theta} f(e^{i

4388: \theta}))^{-1}$ exist and

4389: are finite; hence $\det (w(\theta)) = 0$. All previous statements are

4390: true away from

4391: suitable sets of zero Lebesgue measure.

4392: \end{proof}

4393: 

4394: 

4395: \subsection{Coefficient Stripping, the Schur Algorithm, and

4396: Geronimus' Theorem} \lb{s3.5} The matrix version of Geronimus'

4397: theorem goes back at least to the book of Bakonyi--Constantinescu

4398: \cite{BakCon}. Let $F(z)$ be the matrix-valued Carath\'eodory

4399: function \eqref{rep} (with the same measure $\mu$ as the one used

4400: in the definition of $ \ang{\cdot,\cdot}_R$). Let us denote

4401: \begin{align*}

4402: u_n^L(z) & = \psi_n^L(z) + \varphi_n^L(z) F(z), \\

4403: u_n^R(z) & = \psi_n^R(z) + F(z) \varphi_n^R(z).

4404: \end{align*}

4405: We also define

4406: \begin{align*}

4407: u_n^{L,*}(z) & = \psi_n^{L,*}(z) - F(z) \varphi_n^{L,*}(z), \\

4408: u_n^{R,*}(z) & = \psi_n^{R,*}(z) - \varphi_n^{R,*}(z) F(z).

4409: \end{align*}

4410: 

4411: 

4412: \begin{proposition}\label{prp8}

4413: For any $\abs{z}<1$, the sequences $u_n^L(z)$, $u_n^R(z)$, $u_n^{L,*}

4414: (z)$, $u_n^{R,*}(z)$

4415: are square summable.

4416: \end{proposition}

4417: \begin{proof}

4418: Denote

4419: $$

4420: f(\theta)= \frac{e^{-i\theta}+\bar z}{e^{-i\theta}-\bar z}\, , \qquad

4421: g(\theta)=\frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z}\, .

4422: $$

4423: By the definitions \eqref{a1}--\eqref{a3}, we have

4424: \begin{align*}

4425: u_n^L(z)&= \ang{f, \varphi_n^L}_L,

4426: \\

4427: -u_n^{R,*}(z)&= z^n \ang{\varphi_n^R,g}_R,

4428: \\

4429: -u_n^{L,*}(z)&= z^n \ang{\varphi_n^L,g}_L,

4430: \\

4431: u_n^R(z)&= \ang{f, \varphi_n^R}_R.

4432: \end{align*}

4433: Using the Bessel inequality and the fact that $\abs{z}<1$, we obtain

4434: the required

4435: statements.

4436: \end{proof}

4437: 

4438: Next we will consider sequences defined by

4439: \begin{equation}\label{cocy}

4440: \begin{pmatrix} s_n \\ t_n \end{pmatrix} = A^L(\alpha_{n-1},z) \cdots

4441: A^L(\alpha_0,z) \begin{pmatrix} s_0 \\ t_0 \end{pmatrix}

4442: \end{equation}

4443: where $s_n, t_n\in\calM_l$. Similarly, we will consider the sequences

4444: \begin{equation}\label{cocyr}

4445: (s_n,  t_n ) = (s_0, t_0) A^R(\alpha_{0},z) \cdots A^R(\alpha_{n-1},z)

4446: \end{equation}

4447: 

4448: \begin{theorem}\label{th.solu}

4449: Let $z \in \D$ and let  $f$ be the Schur function associated with $d

4450: \mu$ via \eqref{rep}

4451: and \eqref{Ff}. Then:

4452: \begin{SL}

4453: \item[{\rm{(i)}}] A solution of \eqref{cocy} is square summable if

4454: and only if the initial condition is

4455: of the form

4456: $$

4457: \begin{pmatrix} s_0 \\ t_0 \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} c \\

4458: z f(z) c \end{pmatrix}

4459: $$

4460: for some matrix $c$ in $\calM_l$.

4461: 

4462: \item[{\rm{(ii)}}] A solution of \eqref{cocyr} is square summable if

4463: and only if the initial condition

4464: is of the form

4465: $$

4466: (  s_0, t_0)  = (c, c z f(z))

4467: $$

4468: for some matrix $c$.

4469: \end{SL}

4470: \end{theorem}

4471: 

4472: \begin{proof}

4473: We shall prove (i); the proof of (ii) is similar.

4474: 

4475: 1. By Proposition~\ref{prp8} and \eqref{*1}, \eqref{*2}, we have

4476: the square summable solution

4477: \begin{equation}

4478: \begin{pmatrix} s_n \\ t_n \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} u_n^L(z) \

4479: \ -u_n^{R,*}(z)\end{pmatrix} , \quad

4480: \begin{pmatrix} s_0 \\ t_0 \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} d \\ zf(z)

4481: d \end{pmatrix}, \quad

4482: d =(F(z)+\bdone). \label{a9}

4483: \end{equation}

4484: The matrix $d=F(z)+\bdone$ is invertible. Thus, multiplying the above

4485: solution on the right by

4486: $d^{-1}c$ for any given matrix $c$, we get the ``if" part of the

4487: theorem.

4488: 

4489: \smallskip

4490: 2. Let us check that $\varphi_n^{R,*}c$ is not square summable for

4491: any matrix $c\not=0$.

4492: By the CD formula with $\xi=z$, we have

4493: $$

4494: (1-\abs{z}^2) \sum_{k=1}^{n-1} \varphi_k^L(z)^\dagger \varphi_k^L(z) +

4495: \varphi_n^L(z)^\dagger \varphi_n^L(z) = \varphi_n^{R,*}(z)^\dagger

4496: \varphi_n^{R,*}(z)

4497: $$

4498: and so

4499: $$

4500: \varphi_n^{R,*}(z)^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*}(z) \geq (1-\abs{z}^2)

4501: \varphi_0^L(z)^\dagger \varphi_0^L(z) = (1-\abs{z}^2) \bdone .

4502: $$

4503: Thus, we get

4504: $$

4505: \norm{\varphi_n^{R,*}c}_R2 \ge (1-\abs{z}^2)\Tr c^\dagger c >0.

4506: $$

4507: 

4508: \smallskip

4509: 3. Let $\left(\begin{smallmatrix} s_n  \\ t_n\end{smallmatrix}\right)

4510: $ be any square summable

4511: solution to \eqref{cocy}. Let us write this solution as

4512: \begin{equation}

4513: \begin{pmatrix}s_n \\ t_n \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} \varphi_n^L

4514: a \\ \varphi_n^{R,*}a \end{pmatrix}

4515: + \begin{pmatrix} \psi_n^L b \\ -\psi_n^{R,*}b \end{pmatrix},

4516: \quad a= \frac{s_0+t_0}{2}\, , \quad b= \frac{s_0-t_0}{2}\, .

4517: \label{a10}

4518: \end{equation}

4519: Multiplying the solution \eqref{a9} by $b$ and subtracting from \eqref

4520: {a10}, we get a

4521: square summable solution

4522: $$

4523: \begin{pmatrix} \varphi_n^L (z)(a-F(z)b) \\ \varphi_n^{R,*}(a-F(z)b)

4524: \end{pmatrix}.

4525: $$

4526: It follows that $a=F(z)b$, which proves the ``only if" part.

4527: \end{proof}

4528: 

4529: The Schur  function $f$ is naturally associated with $d\mu$ and

4530: hence with the Verblunsky coefficients $\alpha_0, \alpha_1,

4531: \alpha_2, \dots$. The Schur functions obtained by coefficient

4532: stripping will be denoted by $f_1, f_2, f_3, \dots$, that is,

4533: $f_n$ corresponds to Verblunsky coefficients $\alpha_n,

4534: \alpha_{n+1}, \alpha_{n+2}, \dots$. We also write $f_0 \equiv f$.

4535: 

4536: \begin{theorem}[Schur Algorithm and Geronimus' Theorem]\lb{T3.12}

4537: For the Schur functions $f_0, f_1, f_2, \ldots$ associated with

4538: Verblunsky coefficients $\alpha_0, \alpha_1, \alpha_2, \dots$, the

4539: following relations hold:

4540: \begin{align}

4541: f_{n+1}(z) & = z^{-1} (\rho_n^R)^{-1} [f_n(z) - \alpha_n]\,

4542: [\bdone - \alpha_n^\dagger f_n(z)]^{-1} \rho_n^L, \label{salg}\\

4543: f_n(z) & = (\rho_n^R)^{-1} [z f_{n+1}(z) + \alpha_n] \,[\bdone +

4544: z \alpha_n^\dagger f_{n+1}(z)]^{-1} \rho_n^L. \label{salginv}

4545: \end{align}

4546: \end{theorem}

4547: 

4548: \begin{remarks} 1. See \eqref{1.50} and Theorem~\ref{T1.4} to understand

4549: this result.

4550: 

4551: \smallskip

4552: 2. \eqref{1.82a} provides an alternate way to write \eqref{salg} and \eqref{salginv}.

4553: \end{remarks}

4554: 

4555: \begin{proof}

4556: It clearly suffices to consider the case $n = 0$. Consider the

4557: solution of \eqref{cocy}

4558: with initial condition

4559: $$

4560: \begin{pmatrix} \bdone \\ z f_0(z)\end{pmatrix}.

4561: $$

4562: By Theorem~\ref{th.solu}, there exists a matrix $c$ such that

4563: \begin{align*}

4564: \begin{pmatrix} c \\ z f_1(z) c \end{pmatrix} & = A^L(\alpha_0,z)

4565: \begin{pmatrix} \bdone \\ z f_0(z) \end{pmatrix} \\

4566: & = \begin{pmatrix} z (\rho_0^L)^{-1} - z (\rho_0^L)^{-1}

4567: \alpha_0^\dagger f_0(z) \\ - z (\rho_0^R)^{-1} \alpha_0 + z (\rho_0^R)

4568: ^{-1} f_0(z)

4569: \end{pmatrix}.

4570: \end{align*}

4571: {}From this we can compute $zf_1(z)$:

4572: \begin{align*}

4573: z f_1(z) & = [- z (\rho_0^R)^{-1} \alpha_0 + z (\rho_0^R)^{-1} f_0(z)]

4574: \, [z (\rho_0^L)^{-1} - z

4575: (\rho_0^L)^{-1} \alpha_0^\dagger f_0(z)]^{-1} \\

4576: & = (\rho_0^R)^{-1} [f_0(z) - \alpha_0]\, [\bdone -\alpha_0^\dagger

4577: f_0(z)]^{-1} \rho_0^L

4578: \end{align*}

4579: which is \eqref{salg}.

4580: 

4581: Similarly, we can express $f_0$ in terms of $f_1$. From

4582: \begin{align*}

4583: \begin{pmatrix} \bdone \\ z f_0(z) \end{pmatrix}

4584: & = A^L(\alpha_0,z)^{-1} \begin{pmatrix} c \\ z f_1(z) c \end

4585: {pmatrix}  \\

4586: & = \begin{pmatrix} z^{-1} (\rho_0^L)^{-1} & z^{-1} (\rho_0^L)^{-1}

4587: \alpha_0^\dagger \\

4588: (\rho_0^R)^{-1} \alpha_0 & (\rho_0^R)^{-1} \end{pmatrix}

4589: \begin{pmatrix} c \\ z f_1(z) c \end{pmatrix}  \\

4590: & = \begin{pmatrix} z^{-1} (\rho_0^L)^{-1} c +

4591: (\rho_0^L)^{-1} \alpha_0^\dagger f_1(z) c \\ (\rho_0^R)^{-1}

4592: \alpha_0 c + (\rho_0^R)^{-1} z f_1(z) c \end{pmatrix}

4593: \end{align*}

4594: we find that

4595: \begin{align*}

4596: z f_0(z) & = [(\rho_0^R)^{-1} \alpha_0 c + (\rho_0^R)^{-1}

4597: z f_1(z) c] \,[z^{-1} (\rho_0^L)^{-1} c + (\rho_0^L)^{-1} \alpha_0^

4598: \dagger f_1(z) c ]^{-1} \\

4599: & = [(\rho_0^R)^{-1} \alpha_0 + (\rho_0^R)^{-1} z f_1(z)]\, [z^{-1}

4600: (\rho_0^L)^{-1} +

4601: (\rho_0^L)^{-1} \alpha_0^\dagger f_1(z)]^{-1} \\

4602: & = (\rho_0^R)^{-1} [\alpha_0 + z f_1(z)]\, [z^{-1} \bdone + \alpha_0^

4603: \dagger f_1(z)]^{-1} \rho_0^L

4604: \end{align*}

4605: which gives \eqref{salginv}.

4606: \end{proof}

4607: 

4608: 

4609: \subsection{The CMV Matrix}

4610: 

4611: In this section and the next, we discuss CMV matrices for MOPUC.

4612: This was discussed first by Simon in \cite{SimonRev}, which also

4613: has the involved history in the scalar case. Most of the results

4614: in this section appear already in \cite{SimonRev}; the results of

4615: the next section are new here---they parallel the discussion in

4616: \cite[Sect.~4.4]{S} where these results first appeared in the

4617: scalar case.

4618: 

4619: 

4620: \subsubsection{The CMV basis}

4621: 

4622: Consider the two sequences $\chi_n$, $x_n\in \h$, defined by

4623: \begin{alignat*}{2}

4624: \chi_{2k}(z) &= z^{-k} \varphi_{2k}^{L,*}(z) , \qquad & \chi_{2k-1}

4625: (z) &= z^{-k+1}

4626: \varphi_{2k-1}^R(z),

4627: \\

4628: x_{2k}(z) &= z^{-k} \varphi_{2k}^R(z) , \qquad & x_{2k-1}(z) &= z^{-k}

4629: \varphi_{2k-1}^{L,*}(z).

4630: \end{alignat*}

4631: For an integer $k\geq0$, let us introduce the following notation:

4632: $i_k$ is the $(k+1)$th term of the sequence

4633: $0,1,-1,2,-2,3,-3,\dots$, and $j_k$ is the $(k+1)$th term of the

4634: sequence $0,-1,1,-2,2,-3,3,\dots$. Thus, for example, $i_1=1$,

4635: $j_1=-1$.

4636: 

4637: We use the right module structure of $\h$. For a set of functions

4638: $\{f_k(z)\}_{k=0}^n\subset\h$, its module span is the set of all

4639: sums $\sum f_k(z)a_k$ with $a_k\in \calM_l$.

4640: 

4641: \begin{proposition}

4642: \begin{SL}

4643: \item[{\rm{(i)}}] For any $n\geq 1$, the module span of $\{\chi_k\}_

4644: {k=0}^n$ coincides with the module

4645: span of $\{z^{i_k}\}_{k=0}^n$ and the module span of $\{x_k\}_{k=0}^n

4646: $ coincides with the

4647: module span of $\{z^{j_k}\}_{k=0}^n$.

4648: 

4649: \item[{\rm{(ii)}}] The sequences $\{\chi_k\}_{k=0}^\infty$ and $\{x_k

4650: \}_{k=0}^\infty$ are orthonormal:

4651: \begin{equation}

4652: \ang{\chi_k, \chi_m}_R=\ang{x_k, x_m}_R=\delta_{km}. \label{cmv1}

4653: \end{equation}

4654: \end{SL}

4655: \end{proposition}

4656: 

4657: \begin{proof}

4658: (i) Recall that

4659: \begin{align*}

4660: \varphi_n^R(z)&= \kappa_n^R z^n+\lc\{\bdone,\dots, z^{n-1}\},

4661: \\

4662: \varphi_n^{L,*}(z)&= (\kappa_n^L)^\dagger+\lc\{z,\dots, z^{n}\},

4663: \end{align*}

4664: where both $ \kappa_n^R$ and $(\kappa_n^L)^\dagger$ are invertible

4665: matrices. It follows

4666: that

4667: \begin{align*}

4668: \chi_n(z)&=\gamma_n z^{i_n}+\lc\{z^{i_0},\dots, z^{i_{n-1}}\},

4669: \\

4670: x_n(z)&=\delta_n z^{j_n}+\lc\{z^{j_0},\dots, z^{j_{n-1}}\},

4671: \end{align*}

4672: where  $\gamma_n$, $\delta_n$ are invertible matrices. This proves (i).

4673: 

4674: \smallskip

4675: (ii) By the definition of $\varphi_n^L$ and $\varphi_n^R$, we have

4676: \begin{gather}

4677: \ang{\varphi_n^R, \varphi_m^R}_R=\ang{\varphi_n^{L,*}, \varphi_m^

4678: {L,*}}_R =\delta_{nm},

4679: \label{cmv2}

4680: \\

4681: \ang{\varphi_n^R,z^m}_R=\bdzero, \; m=0,\dots,n-1; \quad \ang

4682: {\varphi_n^{L,*},z^m}_R=\bdzero, \;

4683: m=1,\dots,n. \label{cmv3}

4684: \end{gather}

4685: {}From \eqref{cmv2} with $n=m$, we get

4686: $$

4687: \ang{\chi_n,\chi_n}_R=\ang{x_n,x_n}_R=\bdone.

4688: $$

4689: Considering separately the cases of even and odd $n$, it is easy

4690: to prove that

4691: \begin{alignat}{2}

4692: \ang{\chi_n, z^m}_R &=\bdzero, \quad &  m &= i_0,i_1,\dots,i_{n-1},

4693: \label{cmv4}

4694: \\

4695: \ang{x_n, z^m}_R&=\bdzero, \quad & m &= j_0,j_1,\dots,j_{n-1}. \label

4696: {cmv5}

4697: \end{alignat}

4698: For example, for $n=2k$, $m\in\{i_0,\dots, i_{2k-1}\}$ we have

4699: $m+k\in\{1,2,\dots, 2k\}$ and so, by \eqref{cmv3},

4700: $$

4701: \ang{\chi_n,z^m}_R = \ang{z^{-k}\varphi_{2k}^{L,*},z^m}_R =

4702: \ang{\varphi_{2k}^{L,*},z^{m+k}}_R =\bdzero.

4703: $$

4704: The other three cases are considered similarly. From \eqref{cmv4},

4705: \eqref{cmv5}, and (i), we get \eqref{cmv1} for $k\not=m$.

4706: \end{proof}

4707: 

4708: {}From the above proposition and the $\norm{\cdot}_\infty$-density of

4709: Laurent

4710: polynomials in $C(\partial\bbD)$, it follows that  $\{\chi_k\}_{k=0}^

4711: \infty$ and $

4712: \{x_k\}_{k=0}^\infty$ are right orthonormal modula bases in $\h$,

4713: that is,

4714: any element $f\in \h$ can be represented as a

4715: \begin{equation}

4716: f=\sum_{k=0}^\infty \chi_k\ang{\chi_k,f}_R =\sum_{k=0}^\infty x_k\ang

4717: {x_k,f}_R.

4718: \label{cmv6}

4719: \end{equation}

4720: 

4721: 

4722: \subsubsection{The CMV matrix}

4723: 

4724: Consider the matrix of the right homomorphism $f(z) \mapsto zf(z)$

4725: with respect to the

4726: basis $\{\chi_k\}$. Denote ${\mathcal C}_{nm}=\ang{\chi_n, z \chi_m}_

4727: {R}$. The matrix

4728: ${\mathcal C}$ is unitary in the following sense:

4729: $$

4730: \sum_{k=0}^\infty {\mathcal C}_{kn}^\dagger {\mathcal C}_{km} = \sum_

4731: {k=0}^\infty

4732: {\mathcal C}_{nk} {\mathcal C}_{mk}^\dagger=\delta_{nm} \bdone.

4733: $$

4734: The proof follows from \eqref{cmv6}:

4735: \begin{align*}

4736: \delta_{nm}\bdone & = \ang{z\chi_n,z\chi_m}_R = \biggl< \!\!\!

4737: \biggl< \sum_{k=0}^\infty \chi_k

4738: \ang{\chi_k,z\chi_n}_R,z\chi_m \biggr>\!\!\! \biggr>_R =  \sum_{k=0}^

4739: \infty

4740: {\mathcal C}_{kn}^\dagger {\mathcal C}_{km},

4741: \\

4742: \delta_{nm}\bdone &= \ang{\bar z\chi_n,\bar z\chi_m}_R = \biggl< \!\!

4743: \! \biggl< \sum_{k=0}^\infty

4744: \chi_k \ang{\chi_k,\bar z\chi_n}_R, \bar z\chi_m\biggr>\!\!\!

4745: \biggr>_R = \sum_{k=0}^\infty

4746: {\mathcal C}_{nk} {\mathcal C}_{mk}^\dagger.

4747: \end{align*}

4748: 

4749: We note an immediate consequence:

4750: 

4751: \begin{lemma}\label{sol}

4752: Let $\abs{z}\leq1$. Then, for every $m \ge 0$,

4753: $$

4754: \sum_{n = 0}^\infty \chi_n(z) \mathcal{C}_{nm} = z \chi_m(z), \qquad

4755: \sum_{n = 0}^\infty

4756: \mathcal{C}_{mn} \chi_n(1/\bar z)^\dagger = z \chi_m(1/\bar z)^\dagger.

4757: $$

4758: \end{lemma}

4759: 

4760: \begin{proof}

4761: First note that the above series contains only finitely many non-zero

4762: terms. Expanding

4763: $f(z) = z \chi_n$ according to \eqref{cmv6}, we see that

4764: $$

4765: z \chi_n(z) = \sum_{k=0}^\infty \chi_k(z) \ang{\chi_k,z \chi_n}_R =

4766: \sum_{k=0}^\infty

4767: \chi_k(z) \mathcal{C}_{kn}

4768: $$

4769: which is the first identity. Next, taking adjoints, we get

4770: $$

4771: \bar z \chi_n(z)^\dagger = \sum_{k=0}^\infty \mathcal{C}_{kn}^\dagger

4772: \chi_k(z)^\dagger

4773: $$

4774: which yields

4775: \begin{align*}

4776: \bar z \sum_{n = 0}^\infty \mathcal{C}_{mn} \chi_n(z)^\dagger & =

4777: \sum_{n =

4778: 0}^\infty

4779: \mathcal{C}_{mn} \sum_{k=0}^\infty \mathcal{C}_{kn}^\dagger \chi_k(z)^

4780: \dagger \\

4781: & = \sum_{k=0}^\infty \biggl(\, \sum_{n = 0}^\infty \mathcal{C}_{mn} \,

4782: \mathcal{C}_{kn}^\dagger \biggr) \chi_k(z)^\dagger \\

4783: & = \sum_{k=0}^\infty \delta_{mk} \chi_k(z)^\dagger = \chi_m(z)^\dagger.

4784: \end{align*}

4785: Replacing $z$ by $1/\bar z$, we get the required statement.

4786: \end{proof}

4787: 

4788: 

4789: \subsubsection{The $\mathcal{LM}$-representation}

4790: 

4791: Using \eqref{cmv6} for $f=\chi_m$, we obtain:

4792: \begin{equation}

4793: \mathcal{C}_{nm}=\ang{\chi_n, z \chi_m}_{R} = \sum_{k=0}^\infty \ang

4794: {\chi_n,z x_k}_R

4795: \ang{x_k,\chi_m}_R = \sum_{k=0}^\infty \mathcal{L}_{nk} \mathcal{M}_

4796: {km}. \label{cmv7}

4797: \end{equation}

4798: 

4799: Denote by $\Theta(\alpha)$ the $2l \times 2l$ unitary matrix

4800: $$

4801: \Theta(\alpha) = \begin{pmatrix} \alpha^\dagger & \rho^L \\ \rho^R &

4802: - \alpha

4803: \end{pmatrix}.

4804: $$

4805: Using the Szeg\H o recursion formulas \eqref{szright1} and \eqref

4806: {szright4}, we get

4807: \begin{align}

4808: z \varphi_n^R &= \varphi_{n+1}^R\rho_n^R+\varphi_n^{L,*} \alpha_n^

4809: \dagger,

4810: \label{szright5}

4811: \\

4812: \varphi_{n+1}^{L,*} &= \varphi_{n}^{L,*}\rho_n^L-\varphi_{n+1}^{R}

4813: \alpha_n.

4814: \label{szright6}

4815: \end{align}

4816: Taking $n=2k$ and multiplying by $z^{-k}$, we get

4817: \begin{align*}

4818: z x_{2k} &= \chi_{2k} \alpha_{2k}^\dagger+\chi_{2k+1} \rho_{2k}^R,

4819: \\

4820: z x_{2k+1} &= \chi_{2k} \rho_{2k}^L-\chi_{2k+1} \alpha_{2k}.

4821: \end{align*}

4822: It follows that the matrix $\mathcal{L}$ has the structure

4823: $$

4824: \mathcal{L}  = \Theta(\alpha_0) \oplus \Theta(\alpha_2) \oplus \Theta

4825: (\alpha_4) \oplus

4826: \cdots .

4827: $$

4828: Taking $n=2k-1$ in \eqref{szright5}, \eqref{szright6} and multiplying

4829: by $z^{-k}$, we get

4830: \begin{align*}

4831: \chi_{2k-1} &= x_{2k-1} \alpha_{2k-1}^\dagger+x_{2k} \rho_{2k-1}^R,

4832: \\

4833: \chi_{2k} &= x_{2k-1} \rho_{2k-1}^L-x_{2k} \alpha_{2k-1}.

4834: \end{align*}

4835: It follows that the matrix $\mathcal{M}$ has the structure

4836: \begin{equation}

4837: \mathcal{M} = \bdone \oplus \Theta(\alpha_1) \oplus \Theta(\alpha_3)

4838: \oplus \cdots.

4839: \label{*3}

4840: \end{equation}

4841: Substituting this into \eqref{cmv7}, we obtain:

4842: \begin{equation}\label{cmvmatrix}

4843: \mathcal{C} =

4844: \begin{pmatrix} {}& \alpha_0^\dagger & \rho_0^L \alpha_1^\dagger  &

4845: \rho_0^L \rho_1^L & \bdzero & \bdzero & \cdots & {}

4846: \\

4847: {}& \rho_0^R & -\alpha_0 \alpha_1^\dagger & - \alpha_0 \rho_1^L &

4848: \bdzero & \bdzero & \cdots & {}

4849: \\

4850: {}& \bdzero &  \alpha_2^\dagger \rho_1^R & -\alpha_2^\dagger \alpha_1

4851:     & \rho_2^L \alpha_3^\dagger  & \rho_2^L \rho_3^L & \cdots & {}

4852: \\

4853: {}& \bdzero & \rho_2^R \rho_1^R  & -\rho_2^R \alpha_1

4854:     & -\alpha_2 \alpha_3^\dagger & -\alpha_2 \rho_3^L & \cdots & {}

4855: \\

4856: {}& \bdzero & \bdzero & \bdzero & \alpha_4^\dagger \rho_3^R  & -

4857: \alpha_4^\dagger \alpha_3 & \cdots & {}

4858: \\

4859: {}& \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots

4860: \end{pmatrix}.

4861: \end{equation}

4862: We note that the analogous formula to this in \cite{SimonRev},

4863: namely, (4.30), is incorrect!

4864: The order of the factors below the diagonal is wrong there.

4865: 

4866: \subsection{The Resolvent of the CMV Matrix}

4867: 

4868: We begin by studying solutions to the equations

4869: \begin{alignat}{2}

4870: \sum_{k=0}^\infty {\mathcal C}_{mk} w_k &= zw_m, \quad & m &\geq 2,

4871: \label{r1}

4872: \\

4873: \sum_{k=0}^\infty \tilde w_k {\mathcal C}_{km} &= z\tilde w_m, \quad

4874: &  m &\geq 1. \label{r2}

4875: \end{alignat}

4876: Let us introduce the following functions:

4877: \begin{align*}

4878: \tilde x_n(z) & =\chi_n(1/\bar{z})^\dagger, \\

4879: \Upsilon_{2n}(z) & =-z^{-n}\psi_{2n}^{L,*}(z), \\

4880: \Upsilon_{2n-1}(z)& = z^{-n+1}\psi_{2n-1}^{R}(z), \\

4881: y_{2n}(z) & = - \Upsilon_{2n}(1/\bar{z})^\dagger =z^{-n}\psi_{2n}^{L}

4882: (z), \\

4883: y_{2n-1}(z) & = -\Upsilon_{2n-1}(1/\bar{z})^\dagger=-z^{-n}\psi_{2n-1}

4884: ^{R,*}(z), \\

4885: p_n(z) & = y_n(z)+\tilde x_n(z)F(z), \\

4886: \pi_n(z) & = \Upsilon_n(z)+F(z)\chi_n(z).

4887: \end{align*}

4888: 

4889: \begin{proposition}\label{sol1}

4890: Let $z\in\D\setminus \{0\}$.

4891: \begin{SL}

4892: \item[{\rm{(i)}}] For each $n\geq 0$, a pair of values $(\tilde w_

4893: {2n}, \tilde w_{2n+1})$

4894: uniquely determines a solution $\tilde w_n$ to \eqref{r2}. Also, for

4895: any pair of values

4896: $(\tilde w_{2n},\tilde w_{2n+1})$  in $\calM_l$, there exists a

4897: solution $\tilde w_{n}$ to

4898: \eqref{r2} with these values at $(2n, 2n+1)$.

4899: 

4900: \item[{\rm{(ii)}}] The set of solutions $\tilde w_n$ to \eqref{r2}

4901: coincides with the set of

4902: sequences

4903: \begin{equation}

4904: \tilde w_n (z)= a \chi_n(z) + b\pi_n(z) \label{r3}

4905: \end{equation}

4906: where $a,b$ range over $\calM_l$.

4907: 

4908: \item[{\rm{(iii)}}] A solution \eqref{r3} is in $\ell^2$ if and only

4909: if $a=0$.

4910: 

4911: \item[{\rm{(iv)}}] A solution \eqref{r3} obeys \eqref{r2} for all $m

4912: \geq0$ if and only if $b=0$.

4913: \end{SL}

4914: \end{proposition}

4915: 

4916: \begin{proposition}\label{sol2}

4917: Let $z\in\D\setminus \{0\}$.

4918: \begin{SL}

4919: \item[{\rm{(i)}}] For each $n\geq 1$, a pair of values $(w_{2n-1},

4920: w_ {2n})$ uniquely determines a solution $w_n$ to \eqref{r1}.

4921: Also, for any pair of values $(w_ {2n-1}, w_{2n})$ in $\calM_l$,

4922: there exists a solution $w_{n}$ to \eqref{r1} with these values at

4923: $(2n-1, 2n)$.

4924: 

4925: \item[{\rm{(ii)}}] The set of solutions $w_n$ to \eqref{r1} coincides

4926: with the set of sequences

4927: \begin{equation}

4928: w_n (z)= \tilde x_n(z)a + p_n(z)b \label{r4}

4929: \end{equation}

4930: where $a,b$ range over $\calM_l$.

4931: 

4932: \item[{\rm{(iii)}}] A solution \eqref{r4} is in $\ell^2$ if and only

4933: if $a=0$.

4934: 

4935: \item[{\rm{(iv)}}] A solution \eqref{r4} obeys \eqref{r1} for all $m

4936: \geq0$ if and only if $b=0$.

4937: \end{SL}

4938: \end{proposition}

4939: 

4940: \begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{sol1}]

4941: (i) The matrix ${\mathcal C}-z$ can be written in the form

4942: \begin{equation}

4943: {\mathcal C}-z=

4944: \begin{pmatrix}

4945: A_0 & B_0 & \bdzero & \bdzero & \cdots \\

4946: \bdzero & A_1 & B_1 & \bdzero & \cdots \\

4947: \bdzero & \bdzero & A_2 & B_2 & \cdots \\

4948: \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \vdots & \ddots\\

4949: \end{pmatrix}

4950: \label{r5}

4951: \end{equation}

4952: where

4953: $$

4954: A_0=

4955: \begin{pmatrix}

4956: \alpha_0^\dagger-z\\ \rho_0^R

4957: \end{pmatrix}

4958: \qquad A_n=

4959: \begin{pmatrix}

4960: \alpha^\dagger_{2n} \rho_{2n-1}^R & -\alpha_{2n}^\dagger \alpha_

4961: {2n-1}-z \\

4962: \rho_{2n}^R\rho_{2n-1}^R & -\rho_{2n}^R \alpha_{2n-1}

4963: \end{pmatrix}

4964: $$

4965: $$

4966: B_n=

4967: \begin{pmatrix}

4968: \rho_{2n}^L\alpha_{2n+1}^\dagger & \rho_{2n}^L \rho_{2n+1}^L \\

4969: -\alpha_{2n}\alpha_{2n+1}^\dagger-z & -\alpha_{2n}\rho_{2n+1}^L

4970: \end{pmatrix}.

4971: $$

4972: Define $\wti W_n=(\tilde w_{2n}, \tilde w_{2n+1})$ for

4973: $n=0,1,2,\dots$. Then \eqref{r2} for $m=2n+1$, $2n+2$ is

4974: equivalent to

4975: $$

4976: \wti W_{n} B_n +\wti W_{n+1} A_{n+1}=\bdzero.

4977: $$

4978: It remains to prove that the $2l\times 2l$ matrices $A_j$, $B_j$

4979: are invertible. Suppose that for some $x,y\in \C^l$, $A_n

4980: \binom{x}{y}=\binom{0}{0}$. This is equivalent to the system

4981: \begin{align*}

4982: \alpha_{2n}^\dagger \rho_{2n-1}^R x - \alpha_{2n}^\dagger \alpha_

4983: {2n-1}y-zy&=\bdzero,

4984: \\

4985: \rho_{2n}^R\rho_{2n-1}^Rx - \rho_{2n}^R\alpha_{2n-1}y&=\bdzero.

4986: \end{align*}

4987: The second equation of this system yields

4988: $\rho_{2n-1}^Rx=\alpha_{2n-1} y$ (since $\rho_{2n}^R$ is

4989: invertible), and upon substitution into the first equation, we get

4990: $y=x=0$. Thus, $\ker(A_n)=\{0\}$. In a similar way, one proves

4991: that $\ker(B_n)=\{0\}$.

4992: 

4993: \smallskip

4994: (ii) First note that $\tilde w_n=\chi_n$ is a solution to \eqref{r2}

4995: by Lemma~\ref{sol}.

4996: Let us check that $\tilde w_n=\Upsilon_n$ is also a solution. If $U_

4997: {km}=(-1)^k

4998: \delta_{km}$, then $(U{\mathcal C}U)_{km}$ for $m\geq1$ coincides

4999: with the CMV matrix

5000: corresponding to the coefficients $\{-\alpha_n\}$. Recall that $

5001: \psi_n^{L,R}$ are the

5002: orthogonal polynomials $\varphi_n^{L,R}$, corresponding to the

5003: coefficients

5004: $\{-\alpha_n\}$. Taking into account the minus signs in the

5005: definition of $\Upsilon_n$,

5006: we see that $\tilde w_n=\Upsilon_n$ solves \eqref{r2} for $m\geq1$.

5007: It follows that any

5008: $\tilde w_n$ of the form \eqref{r3} is a solution to \eqref{r2}.

5009: 

5010: Let us check that any solution to \eqref{r2} can be represented as

5011: \eqref{r3}. By (i), it

5012: suffices to show that for any $\tilde w_0, \tilde w_1$, there exist

5013: $a,b\in\calM_l$ such

5014: that

5015: \begin{align*}

5016: a\chi_0(z)+b\pi_0(z)&=\tilde w_0,

5017: \\

5018: a\chi_1(z)+b\pi_1(z)&=\tilde w_1.

5019: \end{align*}

5020: Recalling that $\chi_0=1$, $\Upsilon_0=-1$,

5021: $\Upsilon_1(z)=(z+\alpha_0^\dagger)(\rho_0^R)^{-1}$,

5022: $\chi_1(z)=(z-\alpha_0^\dagger)(\rho_0^R)^{-1}$, we see that the

5023: above system can be

5024: easily solved for $a,b$ if $z\not=0$.

5025: 

5026: \smallskip

5027: (iii) Let us prove that the solution $\pi_n$ is square integrable. We

5028: will consider

5029: separately the sequences $\pi_{2n}$ and $\pi_{2n-1}$ and prove that

5030: they both belong to

5031: $\ell^2$. By \eqref{a2} and \eqref{a2a}, we have

5032: \begin{align}

5033: \psi_n^R(z)+F(z)\varphi_n^R(z) &= \int

5034: \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z} \, d\mu(\theta)\varphi_n^R(e^{i

5035: \theta}), \label{r6}

5036: \\

5037: \psi_n^{L,*}(z)-F(z)\varphi_n^{L,*}(z) &= -z^n\int

5038: \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z}\, d\mu(\theta)\varphi_n^L(e^{i

5039: \theta})^\dagger.

5040: \label{r7}

5041: \end{align}

5042: Taking $n=2k$ in \eqref{r7} and $n=2k-1$ in \eqref{r6}, we

5043: get

5044: \begin{align}

5045: \pi_{2k}(z) &= z^k \int  \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z}\,

5046: d\mu(\theta)\varphi_{2k}^L (e^{i\theta})^\dagger, \label{r8}

5047: \\

5048: \pi_{2k-1}(z) &=

5049: z^{-k+1} \int  \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z} \, d\mu(\theta)

5050: \varphi_{2k-1}^R(e^{i\theta}).

5051: \label{r9}

5052: \end{align}

5053: As $\varphi_{2k}^L$ is an orthonormal sequence, using the Bessel

5054: inequality, from \eqref{r8} we immediately get that $\pi_{2k}$ is

5055: in $\ell^2$.

5056: 

5057: Consider the odd terms $\pi_{2k-1}$. We claim that

5058: \begin{equation}

5059: z^{-k+1} \int

5060: \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z}\, d\mu(\theta)\varphi_{2k-1}^R(e^

5061: {i\theta}) = \int

5062: \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z}\, d\mu(\theta)e^{i(-k+1)\theta}

5063: \varphi_{2k-1}^R(e^{i\theta}).

5064: \label{r10}

5065: \end{equation}

5066: Indeed, using the right orthogonality of $\varphi_{2k-1}^R$ to $e^{im

5067: \theta}$,

5068: $m=0,1,\dots,2k-2$, we get

5069: \begin{align*}

5070: \int  \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z}\, d\mu(\theta) \varphi_

5071: {2k-1}^R (e^{i\theta})

5072: & = \biggl<\!\!\! \biggl< 1+2\sum_{m=1}^\infty \bar z^m e^{im\theta},

5073: \varphi_{2k-1}^R\biggr>\!\!\! \biggr>_R \\

5074: & = \biggl<\!\!\! \biggl<  2 \!\!\! \sum_{m=2k-1}^\infty \bar z^m

5075: e^{im\theta},\varphi_{2k-1}^R\biggr>\!\!\! \biggr>_R

5076: \end{align*}

5077: and

5078: \begin{align*}

5079: \int \frac{e^{i\theta}+z}{e^{i\theta}-z}z^{k-1}\, &e^{i(-k+1)\theta} \,

5080: d\mu(\theta)\varphi_{2k-1}^R(e^{i\theta}) = \\

5081: & = \biggl<\!\!\! \biggl< \bar z^{k-1}e^{i(k-1)\theta} \biggl(1+2\sum_

5082: {m=1}^\infty \bar z^m

5083: e^{im\theta}\biggr),\varphi_{2k-1}^R\biggr>\!\!\! \biggr>_R \\

5084: & = \biggl<\!\!\! \biggl< 2 \!\!\! \sum_{m=2k-1}^\infty \bar z^m

5085: e^{im\theta},\varphi_{2k-1}^R\biggr>\!\!\! \biggr>_R

5086: \end{align*}

5087: which proves \eqref{r10}. The identities \eqref{r10} and \eqref{r9}

5088: yield

5089: $$

5090: \pi_{2k-1}(z) = \biggl<\!\!\! \biggl<

5091: \frac{e^{-i\theta}+\bar z}{e^{-i\theta}-\bar z},\chi_{2k-1}\biggr>\!\!

5092: \! \biggr>_R

5093: $$

5094: and, since $\chi_{2k-1}$ is a right orthogonal sequence, the Bessel

5095: inequality ensures

5096: that $\pi_{2k-1}(z)$ is in $\ell^2$. Thus, $\pi_k(z)$ is in $\ell^2$.

5097: 

5098: Next, as in the proof  of Theorem~\ref{th.solu}, using the CD

5099: formula, we check that the sequence $\norm{\varphi_n^{L,*}(z)}_R$

5100: is bounded below and therefore the sequence $\chi_{2n}(z)$ is not

5101: in $\ell^2$. This proves the statement (iii).

5102: 

5103: \smallskip

5104: (iv) By Lemma~\ref{sol}, the solution $\chi_n(z)$ obeys \eqref{r2}

5105: for all $m\geq0$. It is easy to check directly that the solution

5106: $\pi_n(z)$ does not obey \eqref{r2} for $m=0$ if $z\not=0$. This

5107: proves the required statement.

5108: \end{proof}

5109: 

5110: \begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{sol2}]

5111: (i) For $j=1,2,\dots$, define $W_j=(w_{2j-1}, w_{2j})$. Then, using

5112: the block structure

5113: \eqref{r5}, we can rewrite \eqref{r1} for $m=2j, 2j+1$ as $A_j  W_j

5114: +B_{j}W_{j+1}=\bdzero$. By

5115: the proof of Proposition~\ref{sol1}, the matrices $A_j$ and $B_j$ are

5116: invertible, which

5117: proves (i).

5118: 

5119: \smallskip

5120: (ii) Lemma~\ref{sol} ensures that $\tilde x_n(z)$ is a solution of

5121: \eqref{r1}. As in the

5122: proof of Proposition~\ref{sol1}, by considering the matrix $(U

5123: {\mathcal C}U)_{km}$, one

5124: checks that $y_n(z)$ is also a solution to \eqref{r1}.

5125: 

5126: Let us prove that any solution to \eqref{r1} can be represented in

5127: the form \eqref{r4}.

5128: By (i), it suffices to show that for any $w_1$, $w_2$, there exist

5129: $a,b\in\calM_l$ such that

5130: \begin{align*}

5131: \tilde x_1(z) a + p_1(z) b & = w_1,

5132: \\

5133: \tilde x_2(z) a + p_2(z) b & = w_2.

5134: \end{align*}

5135: We claim that this system of equations can be solved for $a$, $b$.

5136: Here are the main

5137: steps. Substituting the definitions of $\tilde x_n(z)$ and $p_n(z)$,

5138: we rewrite this

5139: system as

5140: \begin{align*}

5141: \varphi_1^{R,*} (a+F(z)b) - \psi_1^{R,*}(z) b & = z w_1,

5142: \\

5143: \varphi_2^{L} (a+F(z)b) + \psi_2^{L}(z) b & = z w_2.

5144: \end{align*}

5145: Using Szeg\H o recurrence, we can substitute the expressions for

5146: $\varphi_2^{L}$, $\psi_2^{L}$, which helps rewrite our system as

5147: \begin{align*}

5148: \varphi_1^{R,*} (a+F(z)b) - \psi_1^{R,*}(z) b & = z w_1,

5149: \\

5150: \varphi_1^{L} (a+F(z)b) + \psi_1^{L}(z) b & = \rho_1^L

5151: w_2+\alpha_1^\dagger  w_1.

5152: \end{align*}

5153: Substituting explicit formulas for $\varphi_1^{R,*}$,

5154: $\varphi_1^{L}$, $ \psi_1^{R,*}$, $\psi_1^{L}$, and expressing

5155: $F(z)$ in terms of $f(z)$, we can rewrite this as

5156: \begin{align*}

5157: (\rho_0^R)^{-1}(1-\alpha_0z)a+2z(\rho_0^R)^{-1}(f(z)-\alpha_0)(\bdone-

5158: zf(z))^{-1}b

5159: & = z w_1,

5160: \\

5161: (\rho_0^L)^{-1}(z-\alpha_0^\dagger)a+2z(\rho_0^L)^{-1}(\bdone-

5162: \alpha_0^\dagger

5163: f(z))(\bdone-zf(z))^{-1}b & = \rho_1^L w_2+\alpha_1^\dagger  w_1.

5164: \end{align*}

5165: Denote

5166: \begin{align*}

5167: a_1 &=(\rho_0^R)^{-1}(1-\alpha_0z)a,

5168: \\

5169: b_1 &=2z(\rho_0^L)^{-1}(\bdone-\alpha_0^\dagger

5170: f(z))(\bdone-zf(z))^{-1}b.

5171: \end{align*}

5172: Then in terms of $a_1$, $b_1$, our system can be rewritten as

5173: \begin{align*}

5174: a_1+X_1b_1 & = z w_1,

5175: \\

5176: X_2a_1+b_1 & = \rho_1^L w_2+\alpha_1^\dagger  w_1,

5177: \end{align*}

5178: where

5179: \begin{align*}

5180: X_1 &=(\rho_0^R)^{-1}(f(z)-\alpha_0)(\bdone-\alpha_0

5181: f(z))^{-1}\rho_0^L,

5182: \\

5183: X_2 &=(\rho_0^L)^{-1}(z-\alpha_0^\dagger)(\bdone-\alpha_0

5184: z)^{-1}\rho_0^R.

5185: \end{align*}

5186: Since $\norm{f(z)}<1$ and $\abs{z}<1$, we can apply

5187: Corollary~\ref{C1.3.5}, which yields $\norm{X_1}<1$ and

5188: $\norm{X_2}<1$. It follows that our system can be solved for

5189: $a_1$, $b_1$.

5190: 

5191: \smallskip

5192: (iii) As $p_n(z)=-\pi_n(1/\bar z)^\dagger$, by Proposition~\ref

5193: {sol1}, we get that

5194: $p_n(z)$ is in $\ell^2$. In the same way, as $\tilde

5195: x_n(z)=\chi_n(1/\bar z)^\dagger$, we get that $\tilde x_n(z)$ is not

5196: in $\ell^2$.

5197: 

5198: \smallskip

5199: (iv) By Lemma~\ref{sol}, the solution $\tilde x_n(z)$ obeys \eqref

5200: {r1} for all $m\geq0$.

5201: Using the explicit formula for $y_n(z)$, one easily checks that the

5202: solution $y_n(z)$

5203: does not obey \eqref{r1} for $m=0,1$.

5204: \end{proof}

5205: 

5206: \begin{theorem} \lb{T3.21}

5207: We have for $z \in \D$,

5208: $$

5209: [(\mathcal{C} - z)^{-1}]_{k,l} =

5210: \begin{cases} (2z)^{-1} \tilde x_k(z) \pi_l(z), & l > k \text{

5211: or } k = l \text{ even}, \\

5212: (2z)^{-1} p_k(z) \chi_l(z), & k > l \text{ or } k = l \text{

5213: odd}.

5214: \end{cases}

5215: $$

5216: \end{theorem}

5217: 

5218: \begin{proof}

5219: Fix $z \in \D$. Write $G_{k,l}(z) = [(\mathcal{C} -

5220: z)^{-1}]_{k,l}$. Then $G_{\bddot , l}(z)$ is equal to

5221: $(\mathcal{C} - z)^{-1} \delta_{l}$, which means that $G_{k,l}(z)$

5222: solves \eqref{r1} for $m \not= l$. Since $G_{\bddot , l}(z)$ is

5223: $\ell^2$ at infinity and obeys the equation at $m = 0$, we see

5224: that it is a right-multiple of $p$ for large $k$ and a

5225: right-multiple of $\tilde x$ for small $k$. Thus,

5226: $$

5227: G_{k,l}(z) =

5228: \begin{cases} \tilde x_k(z) a_l(z), & k < l \text{ or } k = l  \text

5229: { even}, \\

5230: p_k(z) b_l(z), & k > l \text{ or } k = l \text{ odd}.

5231: \end{cases}

5232: $$

5233: Similarly,

5234: $$

5235: G_{k,l}(z) = \begin{cases} \tilde b_k(z) \pi_l(z), & k < l \text

5236: { or } k = l \text{ even}, \\

5237: \tilde a_k(z) \chi_l(z), & k > l \text{ or } k = l \text{ odd}.

5238: \end{cases}

5239: $$

5240: Equating the two expressions, we find

5241: \begin{alignat}{2}

5242: \label{rfp1} \tilde x_k(z) a_l(z) &= \tilde b_k(z) \pi_l(z)  \quad &

5243: k &< l \text{ or } k = l \text{ even}, \\

5244: \label{rfp2} p_k(z) b_l(z) &= \tilde a_k(z) \chi_l(z)  \quad& k &> l

5245: \text{ or } k = l

5246: \text{ odd}.

5247: \end{alignat}

5248: Putting $k = 0$ in \eqref{rfp1} and setting $\tilde b_0(z) = c_1(z)$,

5249: we find $a_l(z) =

5250: c_1(z) \pi_l(z)$. Putting $l = 0$ in \eqref{rfp2} and setting $b_0(z)

5251: = c_2(z)$, we find

5252: $p_k(z) c_2(z) = \tilde a_k(z)$. Thus,

5253: $$

5254: G_{k,l}(z) =

5255: \begin{cases} \tilde x_k(z) c_1(z) \pi_l(z), & k < l \text{ or } k =

5256: l  \text{ even}, \\

5257: p_k(z) c_2(z) \chi_l(z), & k > l \text{ or } k = l \text{ odd}.

5258: \end{cases}

5259: $$

5260: We claim that $c_1(z) = c_2(z) = (2z)^{-1} \bdone$. Consider the

5261: case $k = l = 0$. Then, on the one hand, by the definition,

5262: \begin{align}

5263: G_{0,0}(z) & = \int \frac{1}{e^{i\theta} - z} \, d\mu (e^{i\theta})

5264: \notag

5265: \\

5266: & = \int (2z)^{-1} \biggl[ \frac{e^{i\theta} + z}{e^{i\theta} - z} -

5267: 1 \biggr] d\mu (e^{i\theta}) \notag

5268: \\

5269: &= (2z)^{-1} (F(z) - \bdone)

5270: \label{spthm}

5271: \end{align}

5272: and on the other hand,

5273: $$

5274: G_{0,0}(z) = \tilde x_0(z) c_1(z) \pi_0(z) = c_1(z) (F(z) - \bdone).

5275: $$

5276: This shows $c_1(z) = (2z)^{-1} \bdone$. Next, consider the case $k=1

5277: $, $l=0$. Then, on the one

5278: hand, by the definition,

5279: $$

5280: G_{1,0}(z) = \ang{\chi_1, (e^{i\theta}-z)^{-1}\chi_0}_{R}

5281: $$

5282: and on the other hand,

5283: $$

5284: G_{1,0}(z) = p_1(z) c_2(z) \chi_0(z).

5285: $$

5286: Let us calculate the expressions on the right-hand side. We have

5287: \begin{equation}

5288: p_1(z) c_2(z) \chi_0(z) = (\rho_0^R)^{-1}(-z^{-1}-\alpha_0+(z^{-1}-

5289: \alpha_0)F(z))c_2(z)

5290: \label{r11}

5291: \end{equation}

5292: and

5293: \begin{align*}

5294: \ang{\chi_1, &(e^{i\theta}-z)^{-1}\chi_0}_{R} = \\

5295: & = (\rho_0^R)^{-1} \int (e^{-i\theta}-\alpha_0)d\mu(\theta)(e^{i

5296: \theta}-z)^{-1}

5297: \\

5298: & = (\rho_0^R)^{-1}\int [z^{-1}(e^{i\theta}-z)^{-1}-z^{-1}e^{-i

5299: \theta}-\alpha_0

5300: (e^{i\theta}-z)^{-1}] \, d\mu(\theta)

5301: \\

5302: & = (\rho_0^R)^{-1}\biggl[\frac{1}{2z2}\, (F(z)-\bdone)-\frac{1}{2z}

5303: \, \alpha_0 (F(z)-\bdone) -

5304: \frac{1}{z}\int e^{-i\theta}\, d\mu(\theta)\biggr].

5305: \end{align*}

5306: Taking into account the identity

5307: $$

5308: \int e^{-i\theta}d\mu(\theta)=\alpha_0

5309: $$

5310: (which can be obtained, e.g., by expanding $\ang{\varphi_1^R,

5311: \varphi_0^R}_R=0$),

5312: we get

5313: $$

5314: \ang{\chi_1, (e^{i\theta}-z)^{-1}\chi_0}_{R} = \frac{1}{2z}\,

5315: (\rho_0^R)^{-1}

5316: (-z^{-1}-\alpha_0+(z^{-1}-\alpha_0)F(z)).

5317: $$

5318: Comparing this with \eqref{r11}, we get $c_2(z)=(2z)^{-1}\bdone$.

5319: \end{proof}

5320: 

5321: As an immediate corollary, evaluating the kernel on the diagonal for

5322: even and odd

5323: indices, we obtain the formulas

5324: \begin{align}

5325: \int \varphi_{2n}^L(e^{i\theta})\, \frac{d\mu(\theta)}{e^{i\theta}-z}\,

5326: \varphi_{2n}^L(e^{i\theta})^\dagger &= -\frac1{2 z^{2n+1}}\, \varphi_

5327: {2n}^L(z)

5328: u_{2n}^{L,*}(z), \label{r12}

5329: \\

5330: \int \varphi_{2n-1}^R(e^{i\theta})^\dagger\, \frac{d\mu(\theta)}{e^{i

5331: \theta}-z}\,

5332: \varphi_{2n-1}^R(e^{i\theta}) & = -\frac1{2 z^{2n}}\, u_{2n-1}^{R,*}(z)

5333: \varphi_{2n-1}^R(z). \label{r13}

5334: \end{align}

5335: Combining this with \eqref{wronsk1} and \eqref{wronsk2}, we find

5336: \begin{align}

5337: u_n^L(z) \varphi_n^{L,*}(z) + \varphi_n^L(z) u_n^{L,*}(z) & = 2 z^n,

5338: \label{wronsk5} \\

5339: \varphi_n^{R,*}(z) u_n^R(z) + u_n^{R,*}(z) \varphi_n^R(z) & = 2 z^n.

5340: \label{wronsk6}

5341: \end{align}

5342: 

5343: 

5344: \subsection{Khrushchev Theory} \lb{s3.13}

5345: 

5346: Among the deepest and most elegant methods in OPUC are those of

5347: Khrushchev

5348: \cite{Kh2000,Khr,KhGo}. We have not been able to extend them to

5349: MOPUC! We regard

5350: their extension as an important open question; we present the first

5351: very partial

5352: steps here.

5353: 

5354: Let

5355: $$

5356: \Omega = \{ \theta \,\colon \det w(\theta) > 0 \}.

5357: $$

5358: 

5359: \begin{theorem}

5360: For every $n \ge 0$,

5361: $$

5362: \{ \theta : f_n(e^{i\theta})^\dagger f_n(e^{i\theta}) < \bdone \} =

5363: \Omega

5364: $$

5365: up to a set of zero Lebesgue measure.

5366: 

5367: Consequently,

5368: \begin{equation}\label{fnintlower}

5369: \int \| f_n (e^{i\theta}) \| \, \frac{d\theta}{2\pi} \ge 1 - \frac{|

5370: \Omega|}{2\pi}\, .

5371: \end{equation}

5372: \end{theorem}

5373: 

5374: \begin{proof}

5375: Recall that, by Proposition~\ref{prop.3.16}, up to a set of zero

5376: Lebesgue measure,

5377: $$

5378: \{ \theta\, \colon f_0(e^{i\theta})^\dagger f_0(e^{i\theta}) < \bdone

5379: \} =

5380: \{ \theta\, \colon \det w(\theta) > 0 \}

5381: $$

5382: so, by induction, it suffices to show that, up to a set of zero

5383: Lebesgue measure,

5384: $$

5385: \{ \theta : f_0(e^{i\theta})^\dagger f_0(e^{i\theta}) < \bdone \}

5386: = \{ \theta : f_1(e^{i\theta})^\dagger f_1(e^{i\theta}) < \bdone

5387: \}.

5388: $$

5389: This in turn follows from the fact that the Schur algorithm, which

5390: relates the two functions, preserves the property $g^\dagger g <

5391: \bdone$.

5392: 

5393: Notice that away from $\Omega$, $f_n (e^{i\theta})$ has norm one and

5394: therefore,

5395: $$

5396: \int \| f_n (e^{i\theta}) \| \, \frac{d\theta}{2\pi} \ge \int_

5397: {\Omega^c} \| f_n

5398: (e^{i\theta}) \| \, \frac{d\theta}{2\pi} =  \int_{\Omega^c} 1 \, \frac

5399: {d\theta}{2\pi}

5400: $$

5401: which yields \eqref{fnintlower}.

5402: \end{proof}

5403: 

5404: Define

5405: $$

5406: b_n(z;d\mu) = \varphi_n^L(z;d\mu) \varphi_n^{R,*}(z;d\mu)^{-1}.

5407: $$

5408: 

5409: \begin{proposition}

5410: \begin{SL}

5411: \item[{\rm{(a)}}] $b_{n+1} = (\rho_n^L)^{-1} (z b_n - \alpha_n^

5412: \dagger) (\bdone - z

5413: \alpha_n b_n)^{-1} \rho_n^R$.

5414: 

5415: \item[{\rm{(b)}}] The Verblunsky coefficients of $b_n$ are $(-

5416: \alpha_{n-1}^ \dagger, - \alpha_{n-2}^\dagger, \dots , -

5417: \alpha_0^\dagger, \bdone)$.

5418: \end{SL}

5419: \end{proposition}

5420: 

5421: \begin{proof}

5422: (a) By the Szeg\H{o} recursion, we have that

5423: \begin{align*}

5424: b_{n+1} & = \varphi_{n+1}^L (\varphi_{n+1}^{R,*})^{-1} \\

5425: & = ((\rho_n^L)^{-1} z \varphi_n^L - (\rho_n^L)^{-1}

5426: \alpha_n^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*}) ((\rho_n^R)^{-1}

5427: \varphi_n^{R,*} - z (\rho_n^R)^{-1} \alpha_n \varphi_n^L)^{-1} \\

5428: & = (\rho_n^L)^{-1} (z \varphi_n^L - \alpha_n^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*})

5429: (\varphi_n^{R,*} - z \alpha_n \varphi_n^L)^{-1} \rho_n^R \\

5430: & = (\rho_n^L)^{-1} (z \varphi_n^L (\varphi_n^{R,*})^{-1} -

5431: \alpha_n^\dagger \varphi_n^{R,*} (\varphi_n^{R,*})^{-1})  \\

5432: & \qquad \qquad \qquad (\varphi_n^{R,*} (\varphi_n^{R,*})^{-1} - z

5433: \alpha_n \varphi_n^L

5434: (\varphi_n^{R,*})^{-1})^{-1} \rho_n^R \\

5435: & = (\rho_n^L)^{-1} ( z b_n - \alpha_n^\dagger) (\bdone - z

5436: \alpha_n b_n )^{-1} \rho_n^R.

5437: \end{align*}

5438: 

5439: \smallskip

5440: (b) It follows from part (a) that the first Verblunsky coefficient

5441: of $b_n$ is $- \alpha_{n-1}^\dagger$ and that its first Schur

5442: iterate is $b_{n-1}$; compare Theorem~\ref{T3.12}. This gives the

5443: claim by induction and the fact that $b_0 = \bdone$.

5444: \end{proof}

5445: 

5446: 

5447: \section{The Szeg\H{o} Mapping and the Geronimus Relations} \lb{s4}

5448: 

5449: In this chapter, we present the matrix analogue of the Szeg\H{o}

5450: mapping and the resulting Geronimus relations. This establishes a

5451: correspondence between certain matrix-valued measures on the unit

5452: circle and matrix-valued measures on the interval $[-2,2]$ and,

5453: consequently, a correspondence between Verblunsky coefficients and

5454: Jacobi parameters. Throughout this chapter, we will denote

5455: measures on the circle by $d\mu_C$ and measures on the interval by

5456: $d\mu_I$.

5457: 

5458: The scalar versions of these objects are due to Szeg\H{o} \cite

5459: {Sz22a} and Geronimus \cite{Ger46}. There are four proofs that we

5460: know of: the original argument of Geronimus \cite{Ger46} based on

5461: Szeg\H{o}'s formula in \cite{Sz22a}, a proof of Damanik--Killip

5462: \cite{DKacta} using Schur functions, a proof of Killip--Nenciu

5463: \cite{KN} using CMV matrices, and a proof of Faybusovich--Gekhtman

5464: \cite{FG99} using canonical moments.

5465: 

5466: The matrix version of these objects was studied by

5467: Yakhlef--Marcell\'an \cite{YM} who proved Theorem~\ref{T4.2} below

5468: using the Geronimus--Szeg\H{o} approach. Our proof uses the

5469: Killip--Nenciu--CMV approach. In comparing our formula with \cite

5470: {YM}, one needs the following dictionary (their objects on the

5471: left of the equal sign and ours on the right):

5472: \begin{align*}

5473: H_n &= -\alpha_{n+1}^\dagger ,\\

5474: D_n &= A_n, \\

5475: E_n &= B_{n+1}.

5476: \end{align*}

5477: 

5478: Dette--Studden \cite{DS} have extended the theory of canonical

5479: moments from OPRL to MOPRL.

5480: It would be illuminating to use this to extend the proof that

5481: Faybusovich--Gekhtman

5482: \cite{FG99} gave of Geronimus relations for scalar OPUC to MOPUC.

5483: 

5484: Suppose $d\mu_C$ is a non-trivial positive semi-definite Hermitian

5485: matrix measure on the unit circle that is invariant under $\theta

5486: \mapsto - \theta$ (i.e., $z \mapsto \bar z =z^{-1}$). Then we

5487: define the measure $d\mu_I$ on the interval $[-2,2]$ by

5488: $$

5489: \int f(x) \, d\mu_I(x) = \int f(2 \cos \theta) \, d\mu_C(\theta)

5490: $$

5491: for $f$ measurable on $[-2,2]$. The map

5492: $$

5493: \mathrm{Sz} : d\mu_C \mapsto d\mu_I

5494: $$

5495: is called the Szeg\H{o} mapping.

5496: 

5497: The Szeg\H{o} mapping can be inverted as follows. Suppose $d\mu_I$

5498: is a non-degenerate positive semi-definite matrix measure on

5499: $[-2,2]$. Then we define the measure $d\mu_C$ on the unit circle

5500: which is invariant under $\theta \mapsto - \theta$ by

5501: $$

5502: \int g(\theta) \, d\mu_C(\theta) = \int g \left( \arccos (x/2)

5503: \right) \, d\mu_I(x)

5504: $$

5505: for $g$ measurable on $\partial \D$ with $g(\theta) = g(-\theta)$.

5506: 

5507: We first show that for the measures on the circle of interest in this

5508: section, the

5509: Verblunsky coefficients are always Hermitian.

5510: 

5511: \begin{lemma}\label{alphaherm}

5512: Suppose $d\mu_C$ is a non-trivial positive semi-definite

5513: Hermitian matrix measure on the unit circle. Denote the associated

5514: Verblunsky coefficients by $ \{ \alpha_n \}$. Then, $d\mu_C$ is

5515: invariant under $\theta \mapsto - \theta$ if and only if

5516: $\alpha_n^ \dagger = \alpha_n$ for every $n$.

5517: \end{lemma}

5518: 

5519: \begin{proof}

5520: For a polynomial $P$, denote $\tilde P(z)=P(\bar z)^\dagger$.

5521: 

5522: 1. Suppose that $d\mu_C$ is invariant under $\theta \mapsto - \theta$.

5523: Then we have

5524: $$

5525: \ang{f,g}_L=\ang{\tilde g,\tilde f}_R

5526: $$

5527: for all $f$, $g$. Inspecting the orthogonality conditions which

5528: define $\Phi_n^L$ and $\Phi_n^R$, we see that

5529: \begin{equation}

5530: \tilde\Phi_n^L=\Phi^R_n \text{ and }

5531: \ang{\Phi_n^L,\Phi_n^L}_L=\ang{\Phi_n^R,\Phi_n^R}_R. \label{4.1}

5532: \end{equation}

5533: Next, we claim that

5534: \begin{equation}

5535: \kappa_n^L=\kappa_n^{R,\dagger}.

5536: \label{4.2}

5537: \end{equation}

5538: Indeed, recall the definition of $\kappa_n^L$, $\kappa_n^R$:

5539: \begin{alignat*}{2}

5540: \kappa_n^L&=u_n\ang{\Phi_n^L,\Phi_n^L}_L^{-1/2},

5541: \text{ $u_n$ is unitary, } \kappa_{n+1}^L(\kappa_n^L)^{-1}>0, \quad &

5542: \kappa_0^L &=1,

5543: \\

5544: \kappa_n^R&=\ang{\Phi_n^R,\Phi_n^R}_R^{-1/2}v_n,

5545: \text{ $v_n$ is unitary, } (\kappa_n^R)^{-1}\kappa_{n+1}^R>0, \quad &

5546: \kappa_0^R &=1.

5547: \end{alignat*}

5548: Using this definition and \eqref{4.1}, one can easily prove by induction

5549: that $v_n=u_n^\dagger$ and therefore \eqref{4.2} holds true.

5550: 

5551: Next, taking $z=0$ in \eqref{szmonic}, we get

5552: \begin{align*}

5553: \alpha_n=-(\kappa_n^R)^{-1}\Phi_{n+1}^L(0)^\dagger(\kappa_n^L)^\dagger,

5554: \\

5555: \alpha_n=-(\kappa_n^R)^\dagger\Phi_{n+1}^R(0)^\dagger (\kappa_n^L)^{-1}.

5556: \end{align*}

5557: {}From here and \eqref{4.1}, \eqref{4.2}, we get $\alpha_n=\alpha_n^

5558: \dagger$.

5559: 

5560: \smallskip

5561: 2. Assume $\alpha_n^\dagger=\alpha_n$ for all $n$. Then, by

5562: Theorem~\ref{szethm}(c), we have $\rho_n^L=\rho_n^R$. It follows

5563: that in this case the Szeg\H{o} recurrence relation is invariant

5564: with respect to the change $\varphi_n^L\mapsto \tilde

5565: \varphi_n^R$, $\varphi_n^R\mapsto \tilde \varphi_n^L$. It follows

5566: that $\varphi_n^L= \tilde \varphi_n^R$, $\varphi_n^R=\tilde

5567: \varphi_n^L$. In particular, we get

5568: \begin{equation}

5569: \ang{\varphi_n^L,\varphi_m^L}_L=\ang{\tilde\varphi_m^R, \tilde

5570: \varphi_n^R}_R.

5571: \label{4*}

5572: \end{equation}

5573: Now let $f$ and $g$ be any polynomials; we have

5574: $$

5575: f(z)=\sum_n f_n \varphi^L_n(z),

5576: \quad

5577: \tilde f(z)=\sum_n \tilde \varphi_n^L(z) f_n^\dagger,

5578: $$

5579: and a similar expansion for $g$. Using these expansions and \eqref

5580: {4*}, we get

5581: $$

5582: \ang{f,g}_L=\ang{\tilde g,\tilde f}_R \text{ for all polynomials $f$,

5583: $g$.}

5584: $$

5585: {}From here it follows that the measure $d\mu_C$ is invariant

5586: under $\theta \mapsto - \theta$.

5587: \end{proof}

5588: 

5589: Now consider two measures $d\mu_C$ and $d\mu_I =

5590: \mathrm{Sz}(d\mu_C)$ and the associated CMV and Jacobi matrices.

5591: What are the relations between the parameters of these matrices?

5592: 

5593: \begin{theorem} \lb{T4.2}

5594: Given $d\mu_C$ and $d\mu_I = \mathrm{Sz}(d\mu_C)$ as above, the

5595: coefficients of the associated CMV and Jacobi matrices satisfy the

5596: Geronimus relations:

5597: \begin{align}

5598: B_{k+1} & = \sqrt{\bdone - \alpha_{2k-1}} \; \alpha_{2k}

5599: \sqrt{\bdone-\alpha_{2k-1}} -

5600: \sqrt{\bdone+\alpha_{2k-1}} \; \alpha_{2k-2} \sqrt{\bdone +\alpha_

5601: {2k-1}}\, ,  \lb{4.3}\\

5602: A_{k+1} & = \sqrt{\bdone - \alpha_{2k-1}} \sqrt{\bdone-\alpha_{2k}^2}

5603: \sqrt{\bdone+\alpha_{2k+1}}\, . \lb{4.4}

5604: \end{align}

5605: \end{theorem}

5606: 

5607: \begin{remarks} 1. For these formulas to hold for $k=0$,

5608: we set $\alpha_{-1} = - {\boldsymbol 1}$.

5609: 

5610: \smallskip

5611: 2. There are several proofs of the Geronimus relations in the

5612: scalar case. We follow the proof given by Killip and Nenciu in \cite

5613: {KN}.

5614: 

5615: \smallskip

5616: 3. These $A$'s are, in general, not type~1 or 2 or 3.

5617: \end{remarks}

5618: 

5619: \begin{proof}

5620: For a Hermitian $l \times l$ matrix $\alpha$ with $\| \alpha \| < 1$,

5621: define the unitary

5622: $2l \times 2l$ matrix $S(\alpha)$ by

5623: $$

5624: S(\alpha) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \begin{pmatrix} \sqrt{\bdone - \alpha}

5625: & - \sqrt{\bdone + \alpha} \\

5626: \sqrt{\bdone + \alpha} & \sqrt{\bdone - \alpha} \end{pmatrix}.

5627: $$

5628: Since $\alpha^\dagger = \alpha$, the associated $\rho^L$ and $\rho^R$

5629: coincide and will

5630: be denoted by $\rho$. We therefore have

5631: $$

5632: \Theta(\alpha) = \begin{pmatrix} \alpha & \rho \\ \rho & - \alpha

5633: \end{pmatrix}

5634: $$

5635: and hence, by a straightforward calculation,

5636: \begin{align*}

5637: S(\alpha) \Theta(\alpha) S(\alpha)^{-1} & = \frac{1}{2} \begin

5638: {pmatrix} \sqrt{\bdone - \alpha} & - \sqrt{\bdone + \alpha} \\

5639: \sqrt{\bdone + \alpha} & \sqrt{\bdone - \alpha} \end{pmatrix}  \begin

5640: {pmatrix} \alpha & \rho \\

5641: \rho & - \alpha

5642: \end{pmatrix}  \begin{pmatrix} \sqrt{\bdone - \alpha} & \sqrt{\bdone

5643: + \alpha} \\

5644: - \sqrt{\bdone + \alpha} & \sqrt{\bdone - \alpha} \end{pmatrix} \\

5645: & = \begin{pmatrix} - {\boldsymbol 1} & {\boldsymbol 0} \\

5646: {\boldsymbol 0} & {\boldsymbol

5647: 1} \end{pmatrix}.

5648: \end{align*}

5649: 

5650: Thus, if we define

5651: $$

5652: \mathcal{S} = \bdone\oplus S(\alpha_1)\oplus S(\alpha_3)\oplus \dots

5653: $$

5654: and

5655: $$

5656: \mathcal{R} = \bdone\oplus(-\bdone)\oplus \bdone\oplus(-\bdone)\oplus

5657: \dots,

5658: $$

5659: it follows that (see \eqref{*3})

5660: $$

5661: \mathcal{S} \mathcal{M} \mathcal{S}^\dagger = \mathcal{R}.

5662: $$

5663: 

5664: The matrix $\mathcal{L} \mathcal{M} + \mathcal{M} \mathcal{L}$ is

5665: unitarily equivalent to

5666: $$

5667: \mathcal{A} = \mathcal{S} ( \mathcal{L} \mathcal{M} +

5668: \mathcal{M} \mathcal{L} ) \mathcal{S}^\dagger

5669: =

5670: \mathcal{S}

5671: \mathcal{L} \mathcal{S}^\dagger \mathcal{R} + \mathcal{R}

5672: \mathcal{S} \mathcal{L} \mathcal{S}^\dagger.

5673: $$

5674: Observe that $\mathcal{A}$ is the direct sum of two block Jacobi

5675: matrices. Indeed, it follows quickly from the explicit form of

5676: $\mathcal{R}$ that the even-odd and odd-even block entries of

5677: $\mathcal{A}$ vanish. Consequently, $\mathcal{A}$ is the direct sum

5678: of its odd-odd and even-even block entries. We will call these two

5679: block Jacobi matrices $J$ and $\tilde J$, respectively.

5680: 

5681: Consider $\mathcal C$ as an operator on $\h_v$.

5682: Then $d\mu_C$ is the spectral measure of $\mathcal{C}$

5683: in the following sense:

5684: $$

5685: [\mathcal{C} ^m]_{0,0}=\int e^{im\theta} d\mu_C(\theta);

5686: $$

5687: see \eqref{spthm}. Then, by the spectral theorem, $d\mu_C(-\theta)$

5688: is the spectral measure of $\mathcal{C}^{-1}$ and so

5689: $d\mu_I$ is the spectral measure of

5690: $\mathcal{C}+\mathcal{C}^{-1}=

5691: \mathcal{L} \mathcal{M} + (\mathcal{L} \mathcal{M})^{-1}=

5692: \mathcal{L} \mathcal{M} +\mathcal{M} \mathcal{L}$. Since  $\mathcal{S}

5693: $ leaves $\begin{pmatrix}

5694: {\boldsymbol 1} & {\boldsymbol 0} & {\boldsymbol 0} & {\boldsymbol

5695: 0} & \cdots

5696: \end{pmatrix}^t$ invariant, we see that $d\mu_I$ is the spectral

5697: measure of $J$.

5698: 

5699: To determine the block entries of $J$, we only need to compute the

5700: odd-odd block entries of $\mathcal{A}$. For $k \ge 0$, we have

5701: \begin{align*}

5702: \mathcal{A}_{2k+1,2k+1} & = \begin{pmatrix} \sqrt{\bdone+\alpha_

5703: {2k-1}} &

5704: \sqrt{\bdone - \alpha_{2k-1}} \end{pmatrix}  \begin{pmatrix} -

5705: \alpha_{2k-2} & {\boldsymbol 0} \\ {\boldsymbol 0} & \alpha_{2k}

5706: \end{pmatrix}

5707: \begin{pmatrix} \sqrt{\bdone+\alpha_{2k-1}} \\ \sqrt{\bdone-\alpha_

5708: {2k-1}}

5709: \end{pmatrix} \\

5710: & = \sqrt{\bdone - \alpha_{2k-1}} \; \alpha_{2k} \sqrt{\bdone-\alpha_

5711: {2k-1}} -

5712: \sqrt{\bdone+\alpha_{2k-1}} \; \alpha_{2k-2} \sqrt{\bdone+\alpha_{2k-1}}

5713: \end{align*}

5714: and

5715: \begin{align*}

5716: \mathcal{A}_{2k+1,2k+3} & = \begin{pmatrix} \sqrt{\bdone+\alpha_

5717: {2k-1}} &

5718: \sqrt{\bdone - \alpha_{2k-1}} \end{pmatrix}  \begin{pmatrix}

5719: {\boldsymbol

5720: 0} & {\boldsymbol 0} \\ \rho_{2k} & {\boldsymbol 0}

5721: \end{pmatrix}

5722: \begin{pmatrix} \sqrt{\bdone+\alpha_{2k+1}} \\ \sqrt{\bdone-\alpha_{2k

5723: +1}}

5724: \end{pmatrix} \\

5725: & = \sqrt{\bdone - \alpha_{2k-1}} \sqrt{\bdone-\alpha_{2k}^2}

5726: \sqrt{\bdone+\alpha_{2k+1}}\, .

5727: \end{align*}

5728: The result follows.

5729: \end{proof}

5730: 

5731: As in \cite{KN,S2}, one can also use this to get Geronimus relations

5732: for the

5733: second Szeg\H{o} map.

5734: 

5735: \section{Regular MOPRL} \lb{s5}

5736: 

5737: The theory of regular (scalar) OPs was developed by Stahl--Totik \cite

5738: {StT} generalizing

5739: a definition of Ullman \cite{Ull} for $[-1,1]$. (See Simon \cite

5740: {EqMC} for a review and

5741: more about the history.) Here we develop the basics for MOPRL; it is

5742: not hard to do the same

5743: for MOPUC.

5744: 

5745: \subsection{Upper Bound and Definition} \lb{s5.1}

5746: 

5747: \begin{theorem}\lb{T5.1} Let $d\mu$ be a non-trivial $l\times l$

5748: matrix-valued measure

5749: on $\bbR$ with $E=\supp(d\mu)$ compact. Then {\rm{(}}with $C(E)=$

5750: logarithmic capacity

5751: of $E${\rm{)}}

5752: \begin{equation} \lb{5.1}

5753: \limsup_{n\to\infty}\, \abs{\det(A_1\cdots A_n)}^{1/n} \leq C(E)^l.

5754: \end{equation}

5755: \end{theorem}

5756: 

5757: \begin{remarks} 1. $\abs{\det(A_1\cdots A_n)}$ is constant over

5758: equivalent Jacobi parameters.

5759: 

5760: \smallskip

5761: 2. For the scalar case, this is a result of Widom \cite{Wid} (it

5762: might be older) whose proof

5763: extends to the matrix case.

5764: \end{remarks}

5765: 

5766: \begin{proof} Let $T_n$ be the Chebyshev polynomials for $E$ (see

5767: \cite[Appendix~B]{EqMC} for a

5768: definition) and let $T_n^{(l)}$ be $T_n\otimes\bdone$, that is, the $l

5769: \times l$ matrix polynomial

5770: obtained by multiplying $T_n(x)$ by $\bdone$. $T_n^{(l)}$ is monic

5771: so, by \eqref{2.7d} and \eqref{2.32a},

5772: \begin{align*}

5773: \abs{\det(A_1 \cdots A_n)}^{1/n}

5774: & \leq \biggl| \det\biggl( \int \abs{T_n^{(l)}(x)}^2\, d\mu(x)\biggr)

5775: \biggr|^{1/2n} \\

5776: &\leq \sup_n\, \abs{T_n(x)}^{l/n}.

5777: \end{align*}

5778: By a theorem of Szeg\H{o} \cite{Sz24}, $\sup_n \abs{T_n(x)}^{1/n}\to C

5779: (E)$, so \eqref{5.1} follows.

5780: \end{proof}

5781: 

5782: \begin{definition} Let $d\mu$ be a non-trivial $l\times l$ matrix-valued measure with $E=\supp(d\mu)$

5783: compact. We say $\mu$ is {\it regular\/} if equality holds in \eqref

5784: {5.1}.

5785: \end{definition}

5786: 

5787: \subsection{Density of Zeros} \lb{s5.2}

5788: 

5789: The following is a simple extension of the scalar results

5790: (see \cite{DLS} or \cite[Sect.~2]{EqMC}):

5791: 

5792: \begin{theorem}\lb{T5.2} Let $d\mu$ be a regular measure with $E=\supp

5793: (d\mu)$. Let $d\nu_n$

5794: be the zero counting measure for $\det(p_n^L(x))$, that is, if $\{x_j^

5795: {(n)}\}_{j=1}^{nl}$ are

5796: the zeros of this determinant {\rm{(}}counting degenerate zeros

5797: multiply{\rm{)}}, then

5798: \begin{equation} \lb{5.2}

5799: d\nu_n = \f{1}{nl} \sum_{j=1}^{nl} \delta_{x_j^{(n)}}.

5800: \end{equation}

5801: Then $d\nu_n$ converges weakly to $d\rho_E$, the equilibrium measure

5802: for $E$.

5803: \end{theorem}

5804: 

5805: \begin{remark} For a discussion of capacity, equilibrium measure,

5806: quasi-every (q.e.), etc.,

5807: see \cite[Appendix~A]{EqMC} and \cite{Helms,Land,Ran}.

5808: \end{remark}

5809: 

5810: \begin{proof} By \eqref{2.54L} and \eqref{2.54x},

5811: \begin{equation} \lb{5.3}

5812: \abs{\det(p_n^R(x))} \geq \bigl(\tfrac{d}{D}\bigr)^l

5813: \bigl(1+\bigl(\tfrac{d}{D}\bigr)^2\bigr)^{(n-1)l/2}

5814: \end{equation}

5815: so, in particular,

5816: \begin{equation} \lb{5.4}

5817: \liminf_n\, \abs{\det(p_n^R(x))}^{1/nl} \geq

5818: \bigl(1+\bigl(\tfrac{d}{D}\bigr)^2 \bigr)^{1/2} \geq 1.

5819: \end{equation}

5820: But

5821: \begin{equation} \lb{5.5}

5822: \abs{\det(p_n^R(x))} = \abs{\det(A_1\cdots A_n)}^{-1} \exp (-nl\Phi_

5823: {\nu_n}(x))

5824: \end{equation}

5825: where $\Phi_\nu$ is the potential of the measure $\nu$. Let $\nu_

5826: \infty$ be a limit point of

5827: $\nu_n$ and use equality in \eqref{5.1} and \eqref{5.4} to conclude,

5828: for $x\notin\cvh(E)$,

5829: \[

5830: \exp(-\Phi_{\nu_\infty}(x))\geq C(E)

5831: \]

5832: which, as in the proof of Theorem~2.4 of \cite{EqMC}, implies that $

5833: \nu_\infty=\rho_e$.

5834: \end{proof}

5835: 

5836: The analogue of the almost converse of this last theorem has an extra

5837: subtlety relative to

5838: the scalar case:

5839: 

5840: \begin{theorem}\lb{T5.3} Let $d\mu$ be a non-trivial $l\times l$

5841: matrix-valued measure on

5842: $\bbR$ with $E=\supp(d\mu)$ compact. If $d\nu_n\to d\rho_E$, then

5843: either $\mu$ is regular

5844: or else, with $d\mu=M(x)\, d\mu_\tr(x)$, there is a set $S$ of

5845: capacity zero, so $\det(M(x))=0$

5846: for $d\mu_\tr$-a.e.\ $x\notin S$.

5847: \end{theorem}

5848: 

5849: \begin{remark} By taking direct sums of regular point measures, it is

5850: easy to find regular

5851: measures where $\det(M(x))=0$ for $d\mu_\tr$-a.e.\ $x$.

5852: \end{remark}

5853: 

5854: \begin{proof} For a.e.\ $x$ with $\det(M(x))\neq 0$, we have (see

5855: Lemma~\ref{L5.5} below)

5856: \[

5857: p_n^R(x)\leq C(n+1)\bdone.

5858: \]

5859: The theorem then follows from the proof of Theorem~2.5 of \cite{EqMC}.

5860: \end{proof}

5861: 

5862: \subsection{General Asymptotics} \lb{s5.3}

5863: 

5864: The following generalizes Theorem~1.10 of \cite{EqMC} from OPRL to

5865: MOPRL---it is the matrix analogue

5866: of a basic result of Stahl--Totik \cite{StT}. Its proof is

5867: essentially the same as in \cite{EqMC}. By $\sigma_\ess(\mu)$, we

5868: mean the

5869: essential spectrum of the block Jacobi matrix associated to $\mu$.

5870: 

5871: \begin{theorem}\lb{T5.4} Let $E\subset\bbR$ be compact and let $\mu$

5872: be an $l\times l$ matrix-valued

5873: measure of compact support with $\sigma_\ess(\mu)=E$.

5874: Then the following are equivalent:

5875: \begin{SL}

5876: \item[{\rm{(i)}}] $\mu$ is regular, that is, $\lim_{n\to\infty} \abs

5877: {\det(A_1 \cdots A_n)}^{1/n}

5878: =C(E)^l$.

5879: 

5880: \item[{\rm{(ii)}}] For all $z$ in $\bbC$, uniformly on compacts,

5881: \begin{equation}\lb{5.6}

5882: \limsup \abs{\det(p_n^R(z))}^{1/n} \leq e^{G_E(z)}.

5883: \end{equation}

5884: 

5885: \item[{\rm{(iii)}}] For q.e.\ $z$ in $E$, we have

5886: \begin{equation}\lb{5.7}

5887: \limsup \abs{\det(p_n^R(z))}^{1/n}\leq 1.

5888: \end{equation}

5889: \end{SL}

5890: 

5891: \smallskip

5892: Moreover, if {\rm{(i)--(iii)}} hold, then

5893: \begin{SL}

5894: \item[{\rm{(iv)}}] For every $z\in\bbC\setminus\cvh(\supp(d\mu))$, we

5895: have

5896: \begin{equation}\lb{5.8}

5897: \lim_{n\to\infty}\, \abs{\det(p_n^R(z))}^{1/n} = e^{G_E(z)}.

5898: \end{equation}

5899: 

5900: \item[{\rm{(v)}}] For q.e.\ $z\in\partial\Omega$,

5901: \begin{equation}\lb{5.9}

5902: \limsup_{n\to\infty} \, \abs{\det(p_n^R(z))}^{1/n} =1.

5903: \end{equation}

5904: \end{SL}

5905: \end{theorem}

5906: 

5907: \begin{remarks} 1. $G_E$, the potential theorists' Green's function

5908: for $E$, is defined by $G_E(z)=

5909: -\log(C(E))-\Phi_{\rho_E}(z)$.

5910: 

5911: \smallskip

5912: 2. There is missing here one condition from Theorem~1.10 of \cite

5913: {EqMC} involving general polynomials.

5914: Since the determinant of a sum can be much larger than the sum of the

5915: determinants, it is not obvious

5916: how to extend this result.

5917: \end{remarks}

5918: 

5919: \subsection{Weak Convergence of the CD Kernel and Consequences} \lb

5920: {s5.3A}

5921: 

5922: The results of Simon in \cite{Weak-cd} extend to the matrix case. The

5923: basic result is:

5924: 

5925: \begin{theorem}\lb{T5.4A} The measures $d\nu_n$ and $\f{1}{(n+1)l}\Tr

5926: (K_n(x,x))\, d\mu(x)$

5927: have the same weak limits. In particular, if $d\mu$ is regular,

5928: \begin{equation}\lb{5.9a}

5929: \f{1}{(n+1)l}\, \Tr (K_n(x,x)d\mu(x)) \overset{w}{\longrightarrow} d

5930: \rho_E.

5931: \end{equation}

5932: \end{theorem}

5933: 

5934: As in \cite{Weak-cd}, $(\pi_n M_x \pi_n)^j$ and $(\pi_n M_x^j \pi_n)$

5935: have a difference of

5936: traces which is bounded as $n\to\infty$, and this implies the result.

5937: Once one has this,

5938: combining it with Theorem~\ref{T2.18B} leads to:

5939: 

5940: \begin{theorem}\lb{T5.4B} Let $I=[a,b]\subset E\subset\bbR$ with $E$

5941: compact. Let $\sigma_\ess

5942: (d\mu)=E$ for an $l\times l$ matrix-valued measure, and suppose $d\mu$

5943: is regular for $E$ and

5944: \begin{equation}\lb{5.9b}

5945: d\mu = W(x)\, dx + d\mu_\s

5946: \end{equation}

5947: where $d\mu_\s$ is singular and $\det(W(x))>0$ for a.e.\ $x\in I$. Then,

5948: \begin{alignat}{2}

5949: & \text{\rm{(1)}} \qquad && \lim_{n\to\infty} \int_I p_n^R(x)^\dagger

5950: \, d\mu_\s (x)

5951: p_n^R(x)\to \boldsymbol{0}, \lb{5.9c} \\

5952: & \text{\rm{(2)}} \qquad && \int_I\, \biggl\| \f{1}{n+1} \sum_{j=0}^n

5953: p_j^R(x)^\dagger

5954: W(x) p_j(x) -\rho_E(x)\bdone \biggr\|\, dx \to 0. \lb{5.9d}

5955: \end{alignat}

5956: \end{theorem}

5957: 

5958: 

5959: \subsection{Widom's Theorem} \lb{s5.4}

5960: 

5961: \begin{lemma}\lb{L5.5} Let $d\mu$ be an $l\times l$ matrix-valued

5962: measure supported on a compact

5963: $E\subset\bbR$ and let $d\eta$ be a scalar measure on $\bbR$ so

5964: \begin{equation} \lb{5.10}

5965: d\mu(x) =W(x)\, d\eta(x) + d\mu_\s (x)

5966: \end{equation}

5967: where $d\mu_\s$ is $d\eta$ singular. Suppose for $d\eta$-a.e.\ $x$,

5968: \begin{equation} \lb{5.11}

5969: \det(W(x)) >0.

5970: \end{equation}

5971: Then for $d\eta$-a.e.\ $x$, there is a positive real function $C(x)$

5972: so that

5973: \begin{equation} \lb{5.12}

5974: \norm{p_n^R(x)} \leq C(x) (n+1)\bdone.

5975: \end{equation}

5976: In particular,

5977: \begin{equation} \lb{5.13}

5978: \abs{\det(p_n^R(x))} \leq C(x)^l (n+1)^l.

5979: \end{equation}

5980: \end{lemma}

5981: 

5982: \begin{proof} Since $\norm{p_n^R}_R^2=1$, we have

5983: \begin{equation} \lb{5.14}

5984: \sum_{n=0}^\infty (n+1)^{-2} \norm{p_n^R}_R^2 <\infty

5985: \end{equation}

5986: so

5987: \[

5988: \sum_{n=0}^\infty (n+1)^{-2} \Tr (p_n^R(x)^\dagger W(x) p_n^R(x)) <

5989: \infty

5990: \]

5991: for $d\eta$-a.e.\ $x$. Since \eqref{5.11} holds, for a.e.\ $x$,

5992: \[

5993: W(x)\geq b(x)\bdone

5994: \]

5995: for some scalar function $b(x)$. Thus, for a.e.\ $x$,

5996: \[

5997: \sum_{n=0}^\infty (n+1)^{-2} \Tr(p_n^R(x)^\dagger p_n^R(x)) \leq C(x)^2.

5998: \]

5999: 

6000: Since $\norm{A}^2\leq \Tr(A^\dagger A)$, we find \eqref{5.12}, which

6001: in turn implies \eqref{5.13}.

6002: \end{proof}

6003: 

6004: This lemma replaces Lemma~4.1 of \cite{EqMC} and then the proof there

6005: of Theorem~1.12 extends to give

6006: (a matrix version of the theorem of Widom \cite{Wid}):

6007: 

6008: \begin{theorem}\lb{T5.6} Let $d\mu$ be an $l\times l$ matrix-valued

6009: measure with $\sigma_\ess (d\mu)

6010: =E\subset\bbR$ compact. Suppose

6011: \begin{equation} \lb{5.15}

6012: d\mu(x) =W(x)\, d\rho_E(x) + d\mu_\s (x)

6013: \end{equation}

6014: with $d\mu_\s$ singular with respect to $d\rho_E$. Suppose for $d

6015: \rho_E$-a.e.\ $x$, $\det(W(x))>0$.

6016: Then $\mu$ is regular.

6017: \end{theorem}

6018: 

6019: 

6020: \subsection{A Conjecture} \lb{s5.5}

6021: 

6022: We end our discussion of regular MOPRL with a conjecture---an analog

6023: of a theorem of Stahl--Totik

6024: \cite{StT}; see also Theorem~1.13 of \cite{EqMC} for a proof and

6025: references. We expect the key will be

6026: some kind of matrix Remez inequality. For direct sums, this

6027: conjecture follows from Theorem~1.13 of

6028: \cite{EqMC}.

6029: 

6030: \begin{conjecture}\lb{Con5.7} Let $E$ be a finite union of disjoint

6031: closed intervals in $\bbR$. Suppose

6032: $\mu$ is an $l\times l$ matrix-valued measure on $\bbR$ with $\sigma_

6033: \ess (d\mu) =E$. For each $\eta>0$

6034: and $m=1,2,\dots$, define

6035: \begin{equation} \lb{5.16}

6036: S_{m,\eta} = \{x \,\colon \mu([x-\tfrac{1}{m}, x+\tfrac{1}{m}])\geq e^

6037: {-\eta m}\bdone\}.

6038: \end{equation}

6039: Suppose that for each $\eta$ (with $\abs{\cdot}=$ Lebesgue measure)

6040: \[

6041: \lim_{m\to\infty} \, \abs{E\setminus S_{m,\eta}} =0.

6042: \]

6043: Then $\mu$ is regular.

6044: \end{conjecture}

6045: 

6046: \medskip

6047: 

6048: \noindent{\bf Acknowledgments.} It is a pleasure to thank Alexander Aptekarev, Christian Berg,

6049: Antonio Dur\'an, Jeff Geronimo, Fritz~Gesztesy, Alberto Gr\"unbaum, Paco Marcell\'an,

6050: Ken McLaughlin, Hermann Schulz-Baldes, and Walter Van Assche for useful correspondence.

6051: D.D.\ was supported in part by NSF grants DMS--0500910 and

6052: DMS-0653720. B.S.\ was supported in part by NSF grants DMS--0140592

6053: and DMS-0652919 and U.S.--Israel Binational Science Foundation

6054: (BSF) Grant No.\ 2002068.

6055: 

6056: 

6057: \bigskip

6058: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

6059: \begin{thebibliography}{888}

6060: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

6061: 

6062: %

6063: \bibitem{ALK} R.~Ackner, H.~Lev-Ari, and T.~Kailath,

6064: \emph{The Schur algorithm for matrix-valued meromorphic functions},

6065: SIAM J.\ Matrix Anal.\ Appl. \textbf{15} (1994), 140--150.

6066: %

6067: \bibitem{AG} N.~Akhiezer and I.~Glazman,

6068: \textit{Theory of Linear Operators in Hilbert Space},

6069: Dover Publications, New York (1993).

6070: %

6071: \bibitem{Alp} D.~Alpay,

6072: \textit{The Schur Algorithm, Reproducing Kernel Spaces and System Theory},

6073: SMF/AMS Texts and Monographs \textbf{5}, American Mathematical

6074: Society, Providence, R.I.; Soci\'et\'e Math\'ematique de France, Paris (2001).

6075: %

6076: \bibitem{AN} A.~Aptekarev and E.~Nikishin,

6077: \emph{The scattering problem for a discrete Sturm--Liouville operator},

6078: Mat.\ Sb. \textbf{121(163)} (1983), 327--358.

6079: %

6080: \bibitem{Atk} F.~V.~Atkinson,

6081: \textit{Discrete and Continuous Boundary Problems},

6082: Mathematics in Science and Engineering \textbf{8},

6083: Academic Press, New York-London (1964).

6084: %

6085: \bibitem{BakCon} M.~Bakonyi and T.~Constantinescu,

6086: \textit{Schur's Algorithm and Several Applications},

6087: Pitman Research Notes in Math. \textbf{261},

6088: Longman, Essex, U.K. (1992).

6089: %

6090: \bibitem{BB83} S.~Basu and N.~K.~Bose,

6091: \emph{Matrix Stieltjes series and network models},

6092: SIAM J.\ Math.\ Anal. \textbf{14} (1983), 209--222.

6093: %

6094: \bibitem{BGMS03} E.~D.~Belokolos, F.~Gesztesy, K.~A.~Makarov,

6095: and L.~A.~Sakhnovich,

6096: \emph{Matrix-valued generalizations of the theorems of Borg and Hochstadt},

6097: Evolution Equations (G.~Ruiz Goldstein et al., eds.), pp.~1--34,

6098: Lecture Notes in Pure and Applied Mathematics \textbf{234},

6099: Marcel Dekker, New York (2003).

6100: 

6101: %

6102: \bibitem{Ber} Ju.~M.~Berezans'ki,

6103: \textit{Expansions in Eigenfunctions of Selfadjoint Operators},

6104: Translations of Mathematical Monographs \textbf{17},

6105: American Mathematical Society, R.I. (1968).

6106: %

6107: \bibitem{Berg} C.~Berg,

6108: \emph{The matrix moment problem},

6109: to appear in Coimbra Lecture Notes on Orthogonal Polynomials

6110: (A.~Foulqui\'e Moreno and Amilcar Branquinho, eds.).

6111: %

6112: \bibitem{Berg-Duran1} C.~Berg and A.~J.~Dur{\'a}n,

6113: \emph{Measures with finite index of determinacy or a mathetmatical model

6114: for Dr.~Jekyll and Mr.~Hyde},

6115: Proc.\ Amer.\ Math.\ Soc. \textbf{125} (1997), 523--530.

6116: %

6117: \bibitem{Berg-Duran2} C.~Berg and A.~J.~Dur{\'a}n,

6118: \emph{Orthogonal polynomials and analytic functions associated to positive definite matrices},

6119: J.\ Math.\ Anal.\ Appl. \textbf{315} (2006), 54--67.

6120: %

6121: \bibitem{Bha} R.~Bhatia,

6122: \textit{Matrix Analysis},

6123: Graduate Texts in Mathematics \textbf{169}, Springer-Verlag, New York (1997).

6124: %

6125: \bibitem{CFMV} M.~J.~Cantero, M.~P.~Ferrer, L.~Moral, and L.~Vel\'azquez,

6126: \emph{A connection between orthogonal polynomials on the unit circle

6127: and matrix orthogonal polynomials on the real line},

6128: J.\ Comput.\ Appl.\ Math. \textbf{154} (2003), 247--272.

6129: %

6130: \bibitem{CMV02} M.~J.~Cantero, L.~Moral, and L.~Vel\'azquez,

6131: \emph{Measures and para-orthogonal polynomials on the unit circle},

6132: East J.\ Approx.\ {\bf 8} (2002),  447--464.

6133: %

6134: \bibitem{CMV05} M.~J.~Cantero, L.~Moral, and L.~Vel\'azquez,

6135: \emph{Differential properties of matrix orthogonal polynomials},

6136: J.\ Concr.\ Appl.\ Math. \textbf{3} (2005), 313--334.

6137: %

6138: \bibitem{CMV07} M.~J.~Cantero, L.~Moral, and L.~Vel\'azquez,

6139: \emph{Matrix orthogonal polynomials whose derivatives are also orthogonal},

6140: J.\ Approx.\ Theory \textbf{146} (2007), 174--211.

6141: %

6142: \bibitem{Cartan} E.~Cartan,

6143: \emph{Sur les domaines born\'es homog\`enes de l'espace de $n$

6144: variables complexes},

6145: Abh.\ Math.\ Sem.\ Univ.\ Hamburg \textbf{11} (1935), 116--162.

6146: %

6147: \bibitem{CG05} M.~Castro and F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum,

6148: \emph{Orthogonal matrix polynomials satisfying first order

6149: differential equations: a collection of instructive examples},

6150: J.\ Nonlinear Math.\ Physics \textbf{12} (2005), 63--76.

6151: %

6152: \bibitem{CG} M.~Castro and F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum,

6153: \emph{The algebra of differential operators associated to a family

6154: of matrix valued orthogonal polynomials: five instructive examples},

6155: Int.\ Math.\ Res.\ Not. \textbf{2006:7} (2006), 1--33.

6156: %

6157: \bibitem{CG07} M.~Castro and F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum,

6158: \emph{The noncommutative bispectral problem for operators of order one},

6159: Constr.\ Approx. \textbf{27} (2008), 329--347.

6160: %

6161: \bibitem{CH} G.~Chen and Y.~Hu,

6162: \emph{The truncated Hamburger matrix moment problems in the

6163: nondegenerate and degenerate cases, and matrix continued fractions},

6164: Linear Algebra Appl. \textbf{277} (1998), 199--236.

6165: %

6166: \bibitem{Chi} T.~S.~Chihara,

6167: \textit{An Introduction to Orthogonal Polynomials},

6168: Mathematics and Its Applications \textbf{13}, Gordon and Breach,

6169: New York-London-Paris (1978).

6170: %

6171: \bibitem{CG01} S.~Clark and F.~Gesztesy,

6172: \emph{Weyl--Titchmarsh $M$-function asymptotics for matrix-valued Schr\"odinger operators},

6173: Proc.\ London Math.\ Soc. \textbf{82} (2001), 701--724.

6174: %

6175: \bibitem{CG02} S.~Clark and F.~Gesztesy,

6176: \emph{Weyl--Titchmarsh $M$-function asymptotics, local uniqueness results, trace formulas,

6177: and Borg-type theorems for Dirac operators},

6178: Trans.\ Amer.\ Math.\ Soc. \textbf{354} (2002), 3475--3534.

6179: %

6180: \bibitem{CG03} S.~Clark and F.~Gesztesy,

6181: \emph{On Povzner--Wienholtz-type self-adjointness results for matrix-valued

6182: Sturm--Liouville operators},

6183: Proc.\ Math.\ Soc.\ Edinburgh \textbf{133A} (2003), 747--758.

6184: %

6185: \bibitem{CG04} S.~Clark and F.~Gesztesy,

6186: \emph{On Weyl--Titchmarsh theory for singular finite difference Hamiltonian systems},

6187: J.\ Comput.\ Appl.\ Math.\ {\bf 171} (2004), 151--184.

6188: %

6189: \bibitem{CGHL00} S.~Clark, F.~Gesztesy, H.~Holden, and B.~M.~Levitan,

6190: \emph{Borg-type theorems for matrix-valued Schr\"odinger operators},

6191: J.\ Diff.\ Eqs. \textbf{167} (2000), 181--210.

6192: %

6193: \bibitem{CGR} S.~Clark, F.~Gesztesy, and W.~Renger,

6194: \emph{Trace formulas and Borg-type theorems for matrix-valued Jacobi

6195: and Dirac finite difference operators},

6196: J.\ Diff.\ Eqs. \textbf{219} (2005), 144--182.

6197: 

6198: \bibitem{CGZ07} S.~Clark, F.~Gesztesy, and M.~Zinchenko,

6199: \emph{Weyl--Titchmarsh theory and Borg--Marchenko-type uniqueness results

6200: for CMV operators with matrix-valued Verblunsky coefficients},

6201: Operators and Matrices \textbf{1} (2007), 535--592.

6202: %

6203: \bibitem{CrS} W.~Craig and B.~Simon,

6204: \emph{Log H\"older continuity of the integrated density of states for

6205: stochastic Jacobi matrices},

6206: Comm.\ Math.\ Phys. \textbf{90} (1983), 207--218.

6207: %

6208: \bibitem{DKacta} D.~Damanik and R.~Killip,

6209: \emph{Half-line Schr\"odinger operators with no bound states},

6210: Acta Math. \textbf{193} (2004), 31--72.

6211: %

6212: \bibitem{DKSppt} D.~Damanik, R.~Killip, and B.~Simon,

6213: \emph{Perturbations of orthogonal polynomials with periodic recursion

6214: coefficients}, preprint.

6215: %

6216: \bibitem{Dean-Martin} P.~Dean and J.~L.~Martin,

6217: \emph{A method for determining the frequency spectra of disordered lattices in two-dimensions},

6218: Proc.\ Roy.\ Soc. (London) A \textbf{259} (1960), 409--418.

6219: %

6220: \bibitem{DGIM} A.~M.~Delgado, J.~S.~Geronimo, P.~Iliev, and F.~Marcell\'an,

6221: \emph{Two variable orthogonal polynomials and structured matrices},

6222: SIAM J.\ Matrix Anal.\ Appl. \textbf{28} (2006), 118--147 [electronic].

6223: %

6224: \bibitem{DG92} P.~Delsarte and Y.~V.~Genin,

6225: \emph{On a generalization of the Szeg\H{o}--Levinson recurrence and its

6226: application in lossless inverse scattering},

6227: IEEE Trans.\ Inform.\ Theory {\bf 38} (1992), 104--110.

6228: %

6229: \bibitem{DGK} P.~Delsarte, Y.~V.~Genin, and Y.~G.~Kamp,

6230: \emph{Orthogonal polynomial matrices on the unit circle},

6231: IEEE Trans.\ Circuits and Systems {\bf CAS-25} (1978), 149--160.

6232: %

6233: \bibitem{DGK3} P.~Delsarte, Y.~V.~Genin, and Y.~G.~Kamp,

6234: \emph{Planar least squares inverse polynomials, I.\ Algebraic properties},

6235: IEEE Trans.\ Circuits and Systems {\bf CAS-26} (1979), 59--66.

6236: %

6237: \bibitem{DGK79} P.~Delsarte, Y.~V.~Genin, and Y.~G.~Kamp,

6238: \emph{The Nevanlinna--Pick problem for matrix-valued functions},

6239: SIAM J.\ Appl.\ Math. {\bf 36} (1979), 47--61.

6240: %

6241: \bibitem{DGK2} P.~Delsarte, Y.~V.~Genin, and Y.~G.~Kamp,

6242: \emph{Schur parametrization of positive definite block-Toeplitz systems},

6243: SIAM J.\ Appl.\ Math. {\bf 36} (1979), 34--46.

6244: %

6245: \bibitem{DGK81} P.~Delsarte, Y.~V.~Genin, and Y.~G.~Kamp,

6246: \emph{Generalized Schur representation of matrix-valued functions},

6247: SIAM J.\ Algebraic Discrete Methods {\bf 2} (1981), 94--107.

6248: %

6249: \bibitem{Den} S.~Denisov,

6250: \emph{On Rakhmanov's theorem for Jacobi matrices},

6251: Proc.\ Amer.\ Math.\ Soc. \textbf{132} (2004), 847--852.

6252: %

6253: \bibitem{DS} H.~Dette and W.~J.~Studden,

6254: \emph{Matrix measures, moment spaces and Favard's theorem for the

6255: interval $[0,1]$ and $[0,\infty)$},

6256: Linear Algebra Appl. \textbf{345} (2002), 169--193.

6257: %

6258: \bibitem{DFK} V.~Dubovoj, B.~Fritzsche, and B.~Kirstein,

6259: \textit{Matricial Version of the Classical Schur Problem},

6260: Teubner Texts in Mathematics \textbf{129}, Teubner Verlag, Stuttgart (1992).

6261: %

6262: \bibitem{Dur1} A.~J.~Dur\'an,

6263: \emph{A generalization of Favard's theorem for polynomials satisfying a

6264: recurrence relation},

6265: J.\ Approx.\ Theory \textbf{74} (1993), 83--109.

6266: %

6267: \bibitem{Dur95} A.~J.~Dur\'an,

6268: \emph{On orthogonal polynomials with respect to a positive definite

6269: matrix of measures},

6270: Canad.\ J.\ Math. \textbf{47} (1995),  88--112.

6271: %

6272: \bibitem{Dur96} A.~J.~Dur\'an,

6273: \emph{Markov's theorem for orthogonal matrix polynomials},

6274: Canad.\ J.\ Math. \textbf{48} (1996),  1180--1195.

6275: %

6276: \bibitem{Dur6} A. J. Dur\'an,

6277: \emph{Matrix inner product having a matrix symmetric second order

6278: differential operator},

6279: Rocky Mountain J.\ Math. \textbf{27} (1997), 585--600.

6280: %

6281: \bibitem{Dur99} A.~J.~Dur\'an,

6282: \emph{Ratio asymptotics for orthogonal matrix polynomials},

6283: J.\ Approx.\ Theory \textbf{100} (1999), 304--344.

6284: %

6285: \bibitem{Dur7} A.~J.~Dur\'an,

6286: \emph{How to find weight matrices having symmetric

6287: second order differential operators with matrix leading

6288: coefficient}, preprint.

6289: %

6290: \bibitem{Dur8} A.~J.~Dur\'an,

6291: \emph{Generating weight matrices having symmetric

6292: second order differential operators from a trio of upper

6293: triangular matrices}, preprint.

6294: %

6295: \bibitem{DuDa} A.~J.~Dur\'an and E.~Daneri,

6296: \emph{Ratio asymptotics for orthogonal matrix polynomials with

6297: unbounded recurrence coefficients},

6298: J.\ Approx.\ Theory \textbf{110} (2001), 1--17.

6299: %

6300: \bibitem{DD} A.~J.~Dur\'an and E.~Daneri,

6301: \emph{Weak convergence for orthogonal matrix polynomials},

6302: Indag.\ Math.\ (N.S.) \textbf{13} (2002), 47--62.

6303: %

6304: \bibitem{DDe} A.~J.~Dura\'n and E.~Defez,

6305: \emph{Orthogonal matrix polynomials and quadrature formulas},

6306: Linear Algebra Appl. \textbf{345} (2002), 71--84.

6307: %

6308: \bibitem{DG04} A.~J.~Dur\'an and F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum,

6309: \emph{Orthogonal matrix polynomials satisfying second order

6310: differential equations},

6311: Int.\ Math.\ Res.\ Not. \textbf{2004:10} (2004), 461--484.

6312: %

6313: \bibitem{DG05a} A.~J.~Dur\'an and F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum,

6314: \emph{A survey on orthogonal matrix polynomials satisfying second

6315: order differential equations},

6316: J.\ Comput.\ Appl.\ Math. \textbf{178} (2005), 169--190.

6317: %

6318: \bibitem{DG05b} A.~J.~Dur\'an and F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum,

6319: \emph{Structural formulas for orthogonal matrix polynomials

6320: satysfying second order differential equations, I},

6321: Constr.\ Approx. \textbf{22} (2005), 255--271.

6322: %

6323: \bibitem{DG05c} A.~J.~Dur\'an and F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum,

6324: \emph{Orthogonal matrix polynomials, scalar type Rodrigues'

6325: formulas and Pearson equations}, J.\ Approx.\ Theory. \textbf{134}

6326: (2005), 267--280.

6327: %

6328: \bibitem{DG05d} A.~J.~Dur\'an and F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum,

6329: \emph{A characterization for a class of weight matrices with orthogonal

6330: matrix polynomials satisfying second order differential equations},

6331: Int.\ Math.\ Res.\ Not.\ \textbf{23} (2005), 1371--1390.

6332: %

6333: \bibitem{DG06} A.~J.~Dur\'an and F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum,

6334: \emph{P.~A.~M.~Dirac meets M.~G.~Krein: matrix orthogonal

6335: polynomials and Dirac´s equation},

6336: J.\ Phys.\ A: Math.\ Gen. \textbf{39} (2006), 3655--3662.

6337: %

6338: \bibitem{DG07a} A.~J.~Dur\'an and F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum,

6339: \emph{Matrix orthogonal polynomials satisfying second-order

6340: differential equations: Coping without help from group

6341: representation theory},

6342: J.\ Approx.\ Theory \textbf{148} (2007), 35--48.

6343: %

6344: \bibitem{DG07b} A.~J.~Dur\'an and F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum,

6345: \emph{Matrix differential equations and scalar polynomials

6346: satisfying higher order recursions}, preprint.

6347: %

6348: \bibitem{DGPT}

6349: A.~ Duran, F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum, I.~Pacharoni, and J.~A.~Tirao,

6350: \emph{Matrix orthogonal polynomials and differential operators,

6351: with examples and applications}, in preparation.

6352: %

6353: \bibitem{DdI07a} A.~J.~Dur\'an and M.~D.~de la Iglesia,

6354: \emph{Some examples of orthogonal matrix polynomials satisfying

6355: odd order differential equations},

6356: to appear in J. Approx. Theory.

6357: %

6358: \bibitem{DdI07b} A.~J.~Dur\'an and M.~D.~de la Iglesia,

6359: \emph{Second order differential operators having several families

6360: of orthogonal matrix polynomials as eigenfunctions}, preprint.

6361: %

6362: \bibitem{DL} A.~J.~Dur\'an and P.~L\'opez-Rodr\'\i guez,

6363: \emph{Orthogonal matrix polynomials: zeros and Blumenthal's theorem},

6364: J.\ Approx.\ Theory \textbf{84} (1996), 96--118.

6365: %

6366: \bibitem{DL97a} A.~J.~Dur\'an and P.~L\'opez-Rodr\'\i guez,

6367: \emph{The $L^p$ space of a positive definite matrix of measures

6368: and density of matrix polynomials in $L^1$},

6369: J.\ Approx.\ Theory \textbf{90} (1997), 299--318.

6370: %

6371: \bibitem{DL97b} A.~J.~Dur\'an and P.~L\'opez-Rodr\'\i guez,

6372: \emph{Density questions for the truncated matrix moment problem},

6373: Canad.\ J.\ Math.\ \textbf{49} (1997), 708--721.

6374: %

6375: \bibitem{DL00} A.~J.~Dur\'an and P.~L\'opez-Rodr\'\i guez,

6376: \emph{$N$-extremal matrices of measures for an indeterminate

6377: matrix moment problem},

6378: J.\ Funct.\ Anal.\ \textbf{174} (2000), 301--321.

6379: %

6380: \bibitem{DuLo4} A.~J.~Dur\'an and P.~L\'opez-Rodr\'\i guez,

6381: \emph{The matrix moment problem},

6382: Margarita Mathematica en memoria de Jos\'e Javier Guadalupe

6383: (L.~Espa\~nol and J.~L.~Varona, eds.), pp.~333--348,

6384: Universidad de La Rioja, Logro\~no (2001).

6385: %

6386: \bibitem{DL04} A.~J.~Dur\'an and P.~L\'opez-Rodr\'\i guez,

6387: \emph{Orthogonal matrix polynomials}, Laredo's SIAG Lecture Notes,

6388: (R.~\'Alvarez-Nodarse et al., eds.), pp.~11--43, Advances in the Theory of

6389: Special Functions and Orthogonal Polynomials, Nova Science

6390: Publishers \textbf{1} (2003).

6391: %

6392: \bibitem{DuLo5} A.~J.~Dur\'an and P. L\'opez-Rodr\'\i guez,

6393: \emph{Structural formulas for orthogonal matrix polynomials satisfying second order

6394: differential equations, I},

6395: Constr.\ Approx. \textbf{26} (2007), 29--47.

6396: %

6397: \bibitem{DL07} A.~J.~Dur\'an and P. L\'opez-Rodr\'\i guez,

6398: \emph{Structural formulas for orthogonal matrix polynomials

6399: satisfying second order differential equations, II},

6400: Constr.\ Approx.\ \textbf{26} (2007) 29--47.

6401: %

6402: \bibitem{DLS} A.~J.~Dur\'an, P.~L\'opez-Rodr\'\i guez, and E.~B.~Saff,

6403: \emph{Zero asymptotic behaviour for orthogonal matrix polynomials},

6404: J.\ d'Analyse Math. \textbf{78} (1999), 37--60.

6405: %

6406: \bibitem{DP02} A.~J.~Dur\'an and B.~Polo,

6407: \emph{Gaussian quadrature formulae for matrix weights},

6408: Linear Algebra Appl. \textbf{355} (2002), 119--146.

6409: %

6410: \bibitem{DP} A.~J.~Dur\'an and B.~Polo,

6411: \emph{Matrix Christoffel functions},

6412: Constr.\ Approx. \textbf{20} (2004), 353--376.

6413: %

6414: \bibitem{DVA} A.~J.~Dur\'an and W.~Van Assche,

6415: \emph{Orthogonal matrix polynomials and higher-order recurrence relations},

6416: Linear Algebra Appl. \textbf{219} (1995), 261--280.

6417: %

6418: \bibitem{Dym} H.~Dym,

6419: \textit{$J$ Contractive Matrix Functions, Reproducing Kernel Hilbert

6420: Spaces and Interpolation},

6421: CBMS Regional Conference Series in Math. \textbf{71},

6422: American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I. (1989).

6423: %

6424: \bibitem{Dyu} Yu.~M.~Dyukarev,

6425: \emph{Deficiency numbers of symmetric operators generated by block Jacobi matrices},

6426: Sb.\ Math. \textbf{197} (2006), 1177--1203.

6427: %

6428: \bibitem{ENZG91} T.~Erd\'elyi, P.~Nevai, J.~Zhang, and J.~Geronimo,

6429: \emph{A simple proof of ``Favard's theorem" on the unit circle},

6430: Atti Sem.\ Mat.\ Fis.\ Univ.\ Modena {\bf 39} (1991), 551--556.

6431: %

6432: \bibitem{FG99} L.~Faybusovich and M.~Gekhtman,

6433: \emph{On Schur flows},

6434: J.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 32} (1999), 4671--4680.

6435: %

6436: \bibitem{FrB} G.~Freud,

6437: \textit{Orthogonal Polynomials},

6438: Pergamon Press, Oxford-New York (1971).

6439: %

6440: \bibitem{Fu} P.~A.~Fuhrmann,

6441: \emph{Orthogonal matrix polynomials and system theory},

6442: Rend.\ Sem.\ Mat.\ Univ.\ Politec.\ Torino \textbf{1987}, Special

6443: Issue, 68--124.

6444: %

6445: \bibitem{Ger81} J.~S.~Geronimo,

6446: \emph{Matrix orthogonal polynomials on the unit circle},

6447: J.\ Math.\ Phys. \textbf{22} (1981), 1359--1365.

6448: %

6449: \bibitem{Ger82} J.~S.~Geronimo,

6450: \emph{Scattering theory and matrix orthogonal polynomials on the real line},

6451: Circuits Systems Signal Process \textbf{1} (1982), 471--495.

6452: %

6453: \bibitem{Ge92} J.~S.~Geronimo,

6454: \emph{Polynomials orthogonal on the unit circle with random recurrence coefficients},

6455: Methods of Approximation Theory in Complex Analysis and Mathematical Physics

6456: (Leningrad, 1991), pp.~43--61,

6457: Lecture Notes in Math. \textbf{1550}, Springer, Berlin (1993).

6458: %

6459: \bibitem{GC} J.~S.~Geronimo and K.~M.~Case,

6460: \emph{Scattering theory and polynomials orthogonal on the unit circle},

6461: J.\ Math.\ Phys. {\bf 20} (1979), 299--310.

6462: %

6463: \bibitem{GW07} J.~S.~Geronimo and H.~Woerdeman,

6464: \emph{Two variable orthogonal polynomials on the bicircle and

6465: structured matrices},

6466: SIAM J.\ Matrix Anal.\ Appl. \textbf{29} (2007), 796--825.

6467: %

6468: \bibitem{Ger44} Ya.~L.~Geronimus,

6469: \emph{On polynomials orthogonal on the circle, on trigonometric

6470: moment problem, and on allied Carath\'eodory and Schur functions},

6471: Mat.\ Sb. \textbf{15} (1944), 99--130 [Russian].

6472: %

6473: \bibitem{Ger46} Ya.~L.~Geronimus,

6474: \emph{On the trigonometric moment problem},

6475: Ann.\ of Math. (2) {\bf 47} (1946), 742--761.

6476: %

6477: \bibitem{GBk1} Ya.~L.~Geronimus,

6478: \textit{Polynomials Orthogonal on a Circle and Their Applications},

6479: Amer.\ Math.\ Soc.\ Translation \textbf{1954} (1954), no.~104, 79 pp.

6480: %

6481: \bibitem{GBk} Ya.~L.~Geronimus,

6482: \textit{Orthogonal Polynomials: Estimates, Asymptotic Formulas,

6483: and Series of Polynomials Orthogonal on the Unit Circle and on an

6484: Interval},

6485: Consultants Bureau, New York (1961).

6486: %

6487: \bibitem{Ger77} Ya.~L.~Geronimus,

6488: \emph{Orthogonal polynomials},

6489: Engl.\ translation of the appendix to the Russian

6490: translation of Szeg\H{o}'s book \cite{Szb}, in ``Two Papers on

6491: Special Functions," Amer.\ Math.\ Soc.\ Transl., Ser.~2, Vol.~108,

6492: pp.~37--130, American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I. (1977).

6493: %

6494: \bibitem{GKMT} F.~Gesztesy, N.~J.~Kalton, K.~A.~Makarov, and E.~Tsekanovskii,

6495: \emph{Some applications of operator-valued Herglotz functions},

6496: Operator Theory, System Theory and Related Topics (Beer-Sheva/Rehovot, 1997),

6497: pp.~271--321, Oper.\ Theory Adv.\ Appl. \textbf{123}, Birkh\"auser, Basel (2001).

6498: %

6499: \bibitem{GKM} F.~Gesztesy, A.~Kiselev, and K.~Makarov,

6500: \emph{Uniqueness results for matrix-valued Schr\"odinger, Jacobi, and

6501: Dirac-type operators},

6502: Math.\ Nachr. \textbf{239/240} (2002), 103--145.

6503: %

6504: \bibitem{GS03} F.~Gesztesy and L.~A.~Sakhnovich,

6505: \emph{A class of matrix-valued Schr\"odinger operators with

6506: prescribed finite-band spectra},

6507: Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Spaces, Positivity, System Theory and

6508: Related Topics (D.~Alpay, ed.), pp.~213--253, Operator Theory: Advances and

6509: Applications \textbf{143}, Birkh\"auser, Basel (2003).

6510: %

6511: \bibitem{GS00} F.~Gesztesy and B.~Simon,

6512: \emph{On local Borg--Marchenko uniqueness results},

6513: Comm.\ Math.\ Phys. \textbf{211} (2000), 273--287.

6514: %

6515: \bibitem{GT} F.~Gesztesy and E.~Tsekanovskii,

6516: \emph{On matrix-valued Herglotz functions},

6517: Math.\ Nachr. \textbf{218} (2000), 61--138.

6518: %

6519: \bibitem{GK} I.~Gohberg and M.~Krein,

6520: \textit{Introduction to the Theory of Linear Nonselfadjoint Operators},

6521: Translations of Mathematical Monographs \textbf{18},

6522: American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I. (1969).

6523: %

6524: \bibitem{Gol02} L.~Golinskii,

6525: \emph{Quadrature formula and zeros of para-orthogonal polynomials on

6526: the unit circle},

6527: Acta Math.\ Hungar.\ {\bf 96} (2002), 169--186.

6528: %

6529: \bibitem{KhGo} L.~Golinskii and S.~Khrushchev,

6530: \emph{Ces\`aro asymptotics for orthogonal polynomials on the unit

6531: circle and classes of measures},

6532: J.\ Approx.\ Theory \textbf{115} (2002), 187--237.

6533: %

6534: \bibitem{Gru} F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum,

6535: \emph{Matrix valued Jacobi polynomials},

6536: Bull.\ Sciences Math. \textbf{127} (2003), 207--214.

6537: %

6538: \bibitem{Gru07} F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum,

6539: \emph{Random walks and orthogonal polynomials: some challenges},

6540: preprint.

6541: %

6542: \bibitem{GI07a} F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum and M.~D.~de la Iglesia,

6543: \emph{Matrix valued orthogonal polynomials related to SU$(N+1)$,

6544: their algebras of differential operators and the corresponding curves},

6545: Exp.\ Math.\ \textbf{16} (2007), 189--207.

6546: %

6547: \bibitem{GI07b} F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum and M.~D.~de la Iglesia,

6548: \emph{Matrix valued orthogonal polynomials arising from group

6549: representation theory and a family of quasi-birth-and-death processes},

6550: preprint.

6551: %

6552: \bibitem{GI03} F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum and P.~Iliev,

6553: \emph{A noncommutative version of the bispectral problem},

6554: J.\ Comput.\ Appl.\ Math.\ \textbf{161} (2003), 99--118.

6555: %

6556: \bibitem{GPT01} F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum, I.~Pacharoni, and J.~A.~Tirao,

6557: \emph{A matrix valued solution to Bochner's problem},

6558: J.\ Phys.\ A: Math.\ Gen. \textbf{34} (2001), 10647--10656.

6559: %

6560: \bibitem{GPT02a} F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum, I.~Pacharoni, and J.~A.~Tirao,

6561: \emph{Matrix valued spherical functions associated to the three

6562: dimensional hyperbolic space},

6563: Internat.\ J.\ of Math. \textbf{13} (2002), 727--784.

6564: %

6565: \bibitem{GPT02} F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum, I.~Pacharoni, and J.~A.~Tirao,

6566: \emph{Matrix valued spherical functions associated to the complex projective plane},

6567: J.\ Funct.\ Anal. {\bf 188} (2002), 350--441.

6568: %

6569: \bibitem{GPT03} F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum, I.~Pacharoni, and J.~A.~Tirao,

6570: \emph{Matrix valued orthogonal polynomials of the Jacobi type},

6571: Indag.\ Math. \textbf{14} (2003), 353--366.

6572: %

6573: \bibitem{GPT04} F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum, I.~Pacharoni, and J.~A.~Tirao,

6574: \emph{An invitation to matrix-valued spherical functions: Linearization of

6575: products in the case of complex projective space $P\sb 2({\mathbb C})$},

6576: Modern Signal Processing, pp.~147--160,

6577: Math.\ Sci.\ Res.\ Inst.\ Publ. \textbf{46},

6578: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004).

6579: %

6580: \bibitem{GPT05} F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum, I.~Pacharoni, and J.~A.~Tirao,

6581: \emph{Matrix valued orthogonal polynomials of the Jacobi type:

6582: The role of group representation theory},

6583: Ann.\ Inst.\ Fourier (Grenoble) \textbf{55} (2005), 2051--2068.

6584: %

6585: \bibitem{GT07} F.~A.~Gr\"unbaum and J.~A.~Tirao,

6586: \emph{The algebra of differential operators associated to a weight matrix},

6587: Integr.\ Equ.\ Oper.\ Th. \textbf{58} (2007), 449--475.

6588: %

6589: \bibitem{Helg} S.~Helgason,

6590: \textit{Differential Geometry, Lie Groups, and Symmetric Spaces},

6591: corrected reprint of the 1978 original, Graduate Studies in

6592: Mathematics \textbf{34},

6593: American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I. (2001).

6594: %

6595: \bibitem{Helms} L.~L.~Helms,

6596: \textit{Introduction to Potential Theory},

6597: Pure and Applied Mathematics {\bf 22},

6598: Wiley-Interscience, New York (1969).

6599: %

6600: \bibitem{HL1} H.~Helson and D.~Lowdenslager,

6601: \emph{Prediction theory and Fourier series in several variables},

6602: Acta Math. \textbf{99} (1958), 165--202.

6603: %

6604: \bibitem{HL2} H.~Helson and D.~Lowdenslager,

6605: \emph{Prediction theory and Fourier series in several variables, II},

6606: Acta Math. {\bf 106} (1961), 175--213.

6607: %

6608: \bibitem{IsmBk} M.~E.~H.~Ismail,

6609: \textit{Classical and Quantum Orthogonal Polynomials in One Variable},

6610: Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications \textbf{98},

6611: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2005).

6612: %

6613: \bibitem{JNT89} W.~B.~Jones, O.~Nj\r{a}stad, and W.~J.~Thron,

6614: \emph{Moment theory, orthogonal polynomials, quadrature, and

6615: continued fractions associated with the unit circle},

6616: Bull.\ London Math.\ Soc.\ \textbf{21} (1989), 113--152.

6617: %

6618: \bibitem{Kai74} T.~Kailath,

6619: \emph{A view of three decades of linear filtering theory},

6620: IEEE Trans.\ Inform.\ Theory \textbf{IT-20} (1974), 146--181.

6621: %

6622: \bibitem{Kai87} T.~Kailath,

6623: \emph{Signal processing applications of some moment problems},

6624: Moments in Mathematics, (San Antonio, Tex., 1987),

6625: Proc.\ Sympos.\ Appl.\ Math. \textbf{37}, pp.~71--109,

6626: American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I. (1987).

6627: %

6628: \bibitem{K6.1} T.~Kailath,

6629: \emph{Norbert Wiener and the development of mathematical engineering},

6630: The Legacy of Norbert Wiener: A Centennial Symposium, Proc.\ Sympos.\

6631: Pure Math. \textbf{60}, pp.~93--116, American Mathematical Society,

6632: Providence, R.I. (1997).

6633: %

6634: \bibitem{KVM} T.~Kailath, A.~Vieira, and M.~Morf,

6635: \emph{Inverses of Toeplitz operators, innovations, and orthogonal

6636: polynomials},

6637: SIAM Rev. \textbf{20} (1978), 106--119.

6638: %

6639: \bibitem{Kato} T.~Kato,

6640: \textit{Perturbation Theory for Linear Operators},

6641: second edition, Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften

6642: \textbf {132}, Springer, Berlin-New York (1976).

6643: %

6644: \bibitem{Kh2000} S.~Khrushchev,

6645: \emph{Schur's algorithm, orthogonal polynomials, and convergence of

6646: Wall's continued fractions in $L^2 (\bbT)$},

6647: J.\ Approx.\ Theory \textbf{108} (2001), 161--248.

6648: %

6649: \bibitem{Khr} S.~Khrushchev,

6650: \emph{Classification theorems for general orthogonal polynomials on

6651: the unit circle},

6652: J.\ Approx.\ Theory \textbf{116} (2002), 268--342.

6653: %

6654: \bibitem{KN} R.\ Killip and I.\ Nenciu,

6655: \emph{Matrix models for circular ensembles},

6656: Int.\ Math.\ Res.\ Not. \textbf{2004:50} (2004), 2665--2701.

6657: %

6658: \bibitem{KS} R.~Killip and B.~Simon,

6659: \emph{Sum rules for Jacobi matrices and their applications to spectral theory},

6660: Ann.\ of Math.\ {\bf 158} (2003), 253--321.

6661: %

6662: \bibitem{Kol} A.~N.~Kolmogorov,

6663: \emph{Stationary sequences in Hilbert space},

6664: Bull.\ Univ.\ Moscow {\bf 2} (1941), 40 pp. [Russian].

6665: %

6666: \bibitem{KS88} S.~Kotani and B.~Simon,

6667: \emph{Stochastic Schr\"odinger operators and Jacobi matrices on the strip},

6668: Comm.\ Math.\ Phys. \textbf{119} (1988), 403--429.

6669: %

6670: \bibitem{Krein1} M.~G.~Krein,

6671: \emph{On a generalization of some investigations of G.~Szeg\H{o},

6672: W.~M.~Smirnov, and A.~N.~Kolmogorov},

6673: Dokl.\ Akad.\ Nauk SSSR \textbf{46} (1945), 91--94.

6674: %

6675: \bibitem{Krein2} M.~G.~Krein,

6676: \emph{On a problem of extrapolation of A.~N.~Kolmogorov},

6677: Dokl.\ Akad.\ Nauk SSSR {\bf 46} (1945), 306--309.

6678: %

6679: \bibitem{Krein3} M.~G.~Krein,

6680: \emph{Infinite $J$-matrices and a matrix moment problem},

6681: Dokl.\ Akad.\ Nauk SSSR \textbf{69} (1949), 125--128 [Russian].

6682: %

6683: \bibitem{Lac} J.~Lacroix,

6684: \emph{The random Schr\"odinger operator in a strip},

6685: Probability Measures on Groups, VII (Oberwolfach, 1983), pp.~280--297,

6686: Lecture Notes in Math. \textbf{1064}, Springer, Berlin (1984).

6687: %

6688: \bibitem{Landau} H.~J.~Landau,

6689: \emph{Maximum entropy and the moment problem},

6690: Bull.\ Amer.\ Math.\ Soc. \textbf{16} (1987), 47--77.

6691: %

6692: \bibitem{Land} N.~S.~Landkof,

6693: \textit{Foundations of Modern Potential Theory},

6694: Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York (1972).

6695: %

6696: \bibitem{LR} L.~Lerer and A.~C.~M.~Ran,

6697: \emph{A new inertia theorem for Stein equations, inertia of invertible

6698: Hermitian block Toeplitz matrices and matrix orthogonal polynomials},

6699: Integr.\ Equ.\ Oper.\ Th. \textbf{47} (2003), 339--360.

6700: %

6701: \bibitem{Lev} N.~Levinson,

6702: \emph{The Wiener RMS (root-mean square) error criterion in filter

6703: design and prediction},

6704: J.\ Math.\ Phys.\ Mass.\ Inst.\ Tech. \textbf{25} (1947), 261--278.

6705: %

6706: \bibitem{Lop} P.~L\'opez-Rodr\'\i guez,

6707: \emph{Riesz's theorem for orthogonal matrix polynomials},

6708: Constr.\ Approx. \textbf{15} (1999),  135--151.

6709: %

6710: \bibitem{Lop01} P.~L\'opez-Rodr\'\i guez,

6711: \emph{Nevanlinna parametrization for a matrix moment problem},

6712: Math.\ Scand. \textbf{89} (2001), 245--267.

6713: %

6714: \bibitem{Lub} D.~S.~Lubinsky,

6715: \emph{A new approach to universality limits involving orthogonal polynomials},

6716: to appear in Ann.\ of Math.

6717: %

6718: \bibitem{MarRod} F.~Marcell\'an and I.~Rodriguez,

6719: \emph{A class of matrix orthogonal polynomials on the unit circle},

6720: Linear Algebra Appl. \textbf{121}, (1989), 233--241.

6721: %

6722: \bibitem{MS} F.~Marcell\'an and G.~Sansigre,

6723: \emph{On a class of matrix orthogonal polynomials on the real line},

6724: Linear Algebra Appl. \textbf{181} (1993), 97--109.

6725: %

6726: \bibitem{MY} F.~Marcell\'an and H.~O.~Yakhlef,

6727: \emph{Recent trends on analytic properties of matrix orthonormal polynomials},

6728: Orthogonal Polynomials, Approximation Theory, and Harmonic Analysis

6729: (Inzel, 2000), Electron.\ Trans.\ Numer.\ Anal. \textbf{14} (2002), 127--141

6730: [electronic].

6731: %

6732: \bibitem{MZ} F.~Marcell\'an and S.~M.~Zagorodnyuk,

6733: \emph{On the basic set of solutions of a high-order linear difference equation},

6734: J.\ Diff.\ Equ.\ Appl. \textbf{12} (2006), 213--228.

6735: %

6736: \bibitem{MN} A.~M\'at\'e and P.~Nevai,

6737: \emph{Bernstein's inequality in $L\sp{p}$ for $0<p<1$ and $(C,\,1)$

6738: bounds for orthogonal polynomials},

6739: Ann.\ of Math. (2) \textbf{111} (1980),  145--154.

6740: %

6741: \bibitem{MNT88} A.~M\'at\'e, P.~Nevai, and V.~Totik,

6742: \emph{Strong and weak convergence of orthogonal polynomials},

6743: Am.\ J.\ Math. \textbf{109} (1987), 239--281.

6744: %

6745: \bibitem{M05a} L.~Miranian,

6746: \emph{Matrix valued orthogonal polynomials},

6747: Ph.D.\ Thesis, University of California at Berkeley (2005).

6748: %

6749: \bibitem{M05b} L.~Miranian,

6750: \emph{Matrix valued orthogonal polynomials on the real line:

6751: Some extensions of the classical theory},

6752: J.\ Phys.\ A: Math.\ Gen. \textbf{38} (2005), 5731--5749.

6753: %

6754: \bibitem{M05c} L.~Miranian,

6755: \emph{On classical orthogonal polynomials and differential operators},

6756: J.\ Phys.\ A: Math.\ Gen. \textbf{38} (2005), 6379--6383.

6757: %

6758: \bibitem{MV} S.~Molchanov and B.~Vainberg,

6759: \emph{Schr\"odinger operators with matrix potentials. Transition from

6760: the absolutely continuous to the singular spectrum},

6761: J.\ Funct.\ Anal. \textbf{215} (2004),  111--129.

6762: %

6763: \bibitem{NevFr} P.~Nevai,

6764: \emph{G\'eza Freud, orthogonal polynomials and Christoffel functions. A case study},

6765: J.\ Approx.\ Theory {\bf 48} (1986), 167~pp.

6766: %

6767: \bibitem{Nik} E.~M.~Nikishin,

6768: \emph{The discrete Sturm--Liouville operator and some problems of function theory},

6769: J.\ Soviet Math. \textbf{35} (1987), 2679--2744; Russian original in

6770: Trudy Sem.\ Petrovsk. \textbf{10} (1984), 3--77.

6771: %

6772: \bibitem{PR} I.\ Pacharoni and P.\ Rom\'an,

6773: \emph{A sequence of matrix valued orthogonal polynomials

6774: associated to spherical functions},

6775: Constr.\ Approx. \textbf{28} (2008), 127--147.

6776: %

6777: \bibitem{PT04} I.~Pacharoni and J.~A.~Tirao,

6778: \emph{Three term recursion relation for spherical functions

6779: associated to the complex projective plane},

6780: Math.\ Phys.\ Anal.\ Geom. \textbf{7} (2004), 193--221.

6781: %

6782: \bibitem{PT07a} I.~Pacharoni and J.~A.~Tirao,

6783: \emph{Matrix valued orthogonal polynomials arising from the

6784: complex projective space},

6785: Constr.\ Approx.\  \textbf{25} (2007), 177--192.

6786: %

6787: \bibitem{PT07b} I.~Pacharoni and J.~A.~Tirao,

6788: \emph{Matrix valued orthogonal polynomials associated to the group SU$(N)$},

6789: in preparation.

6790: %

6791: \bibitem{Ran} T.~Ransford,

6792: \textit{Potential Theory in the Complex Plane},

6793: Press Syndicate of the Univesity of Cambridge, New York (1995).

6794: %

6795: \bibitem{RS4} M.~Reed and B.~Simon,

6796: \textit{Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics, IV: Analysis of Operators},

6797: Academic Press, New York (1978).

6798: %

6799: \bibitem{Rod90} L.~Rodman,

6800: \emph{Orthogonal matrix polynomials},

6801: Orthogonal Polynomials (Columbus, OH, 1989), pp.~345--362,

6802: NATO Adv.\ Sci.\ Inst.\ Ser.\ C Math.\ Phys.\ Sci. \textbf{294},

6803: Kluwer, Dordrecht (1990).

6804: %

6805: \bibitem{RT} P.~Rom\'an and J.~A.~Tirao,

6806: \emph{Spherical functions, the complex hyperbolic plane and the

6807: hypergeometric operator},

6808: Internat.\ J.\ Math. \textbf{17} (2006), 1151--1173.

6809: %

6810: \bibitem{Ros} M.~Rosenberg,

6811: \emph{The square integrability of matrix valued functions with respect

6812: to a non-negative Hermitian measure},

6813: Duke Math.\ J. \textbf{31} (1964), 291--298.

6814: %

6815: \bibitem{Schur} I.~Schur,

6816: \emph{\"Uber Potenzreihen, die im Innern des Einheitskreises beschr

6817: \"ankt sind, I, II},

6818: J.\ Reine Angew.\ Math. \textbf{147} (1917), 205--232;

6819: \textbf{148} (1918), 122--145; English translation in

6820: ``I.~Schur Methods in Operator Theory and Signal Processing"

6821: (I.~Gohberg, ed.), pp.~31--59, 66--88, Operator Theory: Advances and Applications

6822: \textbf{18}, Birkh\"auser, Basel (1986).

6823: %

6824: \bibitem{SB04} H.~Schulz-Baldes,

6825: \emph{Perturbation theory for Lyapunov exponents of

6826: an Anderson model on a strip},

6827: Geom.\ Funct.\ Anal.\ \textbf{14} (2004), 1089--1117.

6828: %

6829: \bibitem{SB07} H.~Schulz-Baldes,

6830: \emph{Rotation numbers for Jacobi matrices with matrix entries},

6831: Math.\ Phys.\ Electron.\ J. \textbf{13} (2007), 40 pp.

6832: %

6833: \bibitem{ScZ} B.~Schwarz and A.~Zaks,

6834: \emph{Matrix M\"obius transformations},

6835: Comm.\ Algebra \textbf{9} (1981), 1913--1968.

6836: %

6837: \bibitem{S} B.~Simon,

6838: \emph{Orthogonal Polynomials on the Unit Circle. Part~1. Classical Theory},

6839: Colloquium Publications \textbf{54.1}, American Mathematical Society,

6840: Providence, R.I. (2005).

6841: %

6842: \bibitem{S2} B.~Simon,

6843: \emph{Orthogonal Polynomials on the Unit Circle. Part~2. Spectral Theory},

6844: Colloquium Publications \textbf{54.2}, American Mathematical Society,

6845: Providence, R.I. (2005).

6846: %

6847: \bibitem{S-TI} B.~Simon,

6848: \emph{Trace Ideals and Their Applications}, second edition,

6849: Mathematical Surveys and Monographs

6850: \textbf{120}, American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I. (2005).

6851: %

6852: \bibitem{SimonRev} B.~Simon,

6853: \emph{CMV matrices: Five years after},

6854: J.\ Comput.\ Appl.\ Math. \textbf{208} (2007), 120--154.

6855: %

6856: \bibitem{EqMC} B.~Simon,

6857: \emph{Equilibrium measures and capacities in spectral theory},

6858: Inverse Problems and Imaging \textbf{1} (2007), 376-382.

6859: %

6860: \bibitem{S308} B.~Simon,

6861: \emph{Rank one perturbations and the zeros of paraorthogonal

6862: polynomials on the unit circle},

6863: J.\ Math.\ Anal.\ Appl. \textbf{329} (2007), 376--382.

6864: %

6865: \bibitem{2ext} B.~Simon,

6866: \emph{Two extensions of Lubinsky's universality theorem},

6867: to appear in J.\ Anal.\ Math.

6868: %

6869: \bibitem{Weak-cd} B.~Simon,

6870: \emph{Weak convergence of CD kernels and applications}, preprint.

6871: %

6872: \bibitem{Sim-cd} B.~Simon,

6873: \emph{The Christoffel--Darboux kernel},

6874: in preparation, to appear in Maz'ya Birthday volume.

6875: %

6876: \bibitem{Rice} B.~Simon,

6877: \textit{Szeg\H{o}'s Theorem and Its Descendants: Spectral Theory for

6878: $L^2$ Perturbations of Orthogonal Polynomials}, in preparation;

6879: to be published by Princeton University Press.

6880: %

6881: \bibitem{Sinap} A.~Sinap,

6882: \emph{Gaussian quadrature for matrix valued functions on the real line},

6883: J.\ Comput.\ Appl.\ Math. \textbf{65} (1995),  369--385.

6884: %

6885: \bibitem{SinapVanAsche} A.~Sinap and W.~Van Assche,

6886: \emph{Orthogonal matrix polynomials and applications},

6887: J.\ Comput.\ Appl.\ Math. \textbf{66} (1996), 27--52.

6888: %

6889: \bibitem{SVI} V.~N.~Sorokin and J.~Van Iseghem,

6890: \emph{Matrix continued fractions},

6891: J.\ Approx.\ Theory \textbf{96} (1999),  237--257.

6892: %

6893: \bibitem{StT} H.~Stahl and V.~Totik,

6894: \emph{General Orthogonal Polynomials},

6895: Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications \textbf{43},

6896: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1992).

6897: %

6898: \bibitem{Stie} T.~Stieltjes,

6899: \emph{Recherches sur les fractions continues},

6900: Ann.\ Fac.\ Sci.\ Univ.\ Toulouse {\bf 8} (1894--1895), J76--J122;

6901: ibid. {\bf 9}, A5--A47.

6902: %

6903: \bibitem{Sz22a} G.~Szeg\H{o},

6904: \emph{\"Uber den asymptotischen Ausdruck von Polynomen, die durch eine

6905: Orthogonalit\"atseigenschaft definiert sind},

6906: Math.\ Ann. {\bf 86} (1922), 114--139.

6907: %

6908: \bibitem{Sz24} G.~Szeg\H{o},

6909: {\it Bemerkungen zu einer Arbeit von Herrn M. Fekete: \"Uber die

6910: Verteilung der Wurzeln bei gewissen algebraischen Gleichungen mit

6911: ganzzahligen Koeffizienten},

6912: Math.\ Z. {\bf 21} (1924), 203--208.

6913: %

6914: \bibitem{Szb} G. Szeg\H{o},

6915: \textit{Orthogonal Polynomials}, Amer.\ Math.\ Soc.\ Colloq.\ Publ.

6916: \textbf{23}, American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I. (1939);

6917: third edition, (1967).

6918: %

6919: \bibitem{Teschl} G.~Teschl,

6920: \textit{Jacobi Operators and Completely Integrable Nonlinear Lattices},

6921: Mathematical Surveys and Monographs \textbf{72}, American

6922: Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I. (2000).

6923: %

6924: \bibitem{Tirao} J.~A.~Tirao,

6925: \emph{The matrix valued hypergeometric equation},

6926: Proc.\ Nat.\ Acad.\ Sci.\ U.S.A. \textbf{100} (2003), 8138--8141.

6927: %

6928: \bibitem{Tot} V.~Totik,

6929: \emph{Asymptotics for Christoffel functions for general measures on

6930: the real line},

6931: J.\ Anal.\ Math. \textbf{81} (2000), 283--303.

6932: %

6933: \bibitem{Tot-acta} V.~Totik,

6934: \emph{Polynomial inverse images and polynomial inequalities},

6935: Acta Math. \textbf{187} (2001), 139--160.

6936: %

6937: \bibitem{Tot-prep} V.~Totik,

6938: \emph{Universality and fine zero spacing on general sets},

6939: in preparation.

6940: %

6941: \bibitem{Ull} J.~L.~Ullman,

6942: \emph{On the regular behaviour of orthogonal polynomials},

6943: Proc.\ London Math.\ Soc. (3) \textbf{24} (1972), 119--148.

6944: %

6945: \bibitem{vA} W.\ Van Assche,

6946: \emph{Rakhmanov's theorem for orthogonal matrix polynomials on the

6947: unit circle},

6948: J.\ Approx.\ Theory \textbf{146} (2007), 227--242.

6949: %

6950: \bibitem{V35} S.~Verblunsky,

6951: \emph{On positive harmonic functions: A contribution to the algebra

6952: of Fourier series},

6953: Proc.\ London Math.\ Soc. (2) \textbf{38} (1935), 125--157.

6954: %

6955: \bibitem{Weyl} H.~Weyl,

6956: \emph{\"Uber gew\"ohnliche Differentialgleichungen mit Singularit\"aten

6957: und die zugeh\"origen Entwicklungen willk\"urlicher Funktionen},

6958: Math.\ Ann. {\bf 68} (1910), 220--269.

6959: %

6960: \bibitem{Whit} P.~Whittle,

6961: \emph{On the fitting of multivariate autoregressions and the

6962: approximate canonical factorization of a spectral density matrix},

6963: Biometrika \textbf{50} (1963), 129--134.

6964: %

6965: \bibitem{Wid} H.~Widom,

6966: \emph{Polynomials associated with measures in the complex plane},

6967: J.\ Math.\ Mech. {\bf 16} (1967), 997--1013.

6968: %

6969: \bibitem{Wie} N.~Wiener,

6970: \textit{Extrapolation, Interpolation, and Smoothing of Stationary

6971: Time Series. With Engineering Applications},

6972: The Technology Press of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology,

6973: Cambridge, Mass. (1949).

6974: %

6975: \bibitem{Wong} M.-W.~L.~Wong,

6976: \emph{First and second kind paraorthogonal polynomials and their zeros},

6977: J.\ Approx.\ Theory \textbf{146} (2007), 282--293.

6978: %

6979: \bibitem{Yak} H.~O.~Yakhlef,

6980: \emph{Relative asymptotics for orthogonal matrix polynomials with

6981: unbounded recurrence coefficients},

6982: Integral Transforms Spec.\ Funct. \textbf{18} (2007), 39--57.

6983: %

6984: \bibitem{YM} H.~O.~Yakhlef and F.~Marcell\'an,

6985: \emph{Orthogonal matrix polynomials, connection between

6986: recurrences on the unit circle and on a finite interval},

6987: Approximation, Optimization and Mathematical Economics

6988: (Pointe-\`a-Pitre, 1999), pp.~369--382, Physica, Heidelberg (2001).

6989: %

6990: \bibitem{YM02} H.~O.~Yakhlef and F.~Marcell\'an,

6991: \emph{Relative asymptotics for orthogonal matrix polynomials with

6992: respect to a perturbed matrix measure on the unit circle},

6993: Approx.\ Theory Appl.\ (N.S.) \textbf{18} (2002), 1--19.

6994: %

6995: \bibitem{YMP01} H.~O.~Yakhlef, F.~Marcell\'an, and M.~A.~Pi\~{n}ar,

6996: \emph{Perturbations in the Nevai matrix class of orthogonal matrix

6997: polynomials},

6998: Linear Algebra Appl. \textbf{336} (2001), 231--254.

6999: %

7000: \bibitem{YMP02} H.~O.~Yakhlef, F.~Marcell\'an, and M.~A.~Pi\~{n}ar,

7001: \emph{Relative asymptotics for orthogonal matrix polynomials with

7002: convergent recurrence coefficients},

7003: J.\ Approx.\ Theory \textbf{111} (2001), 1--30.

7004: %

7005: \bibitem{YK} D.~C.~Youla and N.~N.~Kazanjian,

7006: \emph{Bauer-type factorization of positive matrices and the theory of

7007: matrix polynomials orthogonal on the unit circle},

7008: IEEE Trans.\ Circuits and Systems {\bf CAS-25} (1978), 57--69.

7009: %

7010: \bibitem{Zyg} M.~Zygmunt,

7011: \emph{Matrix Chebyshev polynomials and continued fractions},

7012: Linear Algebra Appl. \textbf{340} (2002), 155--168.

7013: 

7014: 

7015: \end{thebibliography}

7016: 

7017: \bigskip

7018: \noindent David Damanik \\

7019: \noindent Department of Mathematics \\

7020: \noindent Rice University \\

7021: \noindent Houston, TX 77005, USA \\

7022: \noindent damanik@rice.edu

7023: 

7024: \bigskip

7025: \noindent Alexander Pushnitski \\

7026: \noindent Department of Mathematics \\

7027: \noindent King's College London \\

7028: \noindent Strand, London WC2R 2LS, UK \\

7029: \noindent alexander.pushnitski@kcl.ac.uk

7030: 

7031: \bigskip

7032: \noindent Barry Simon \\

7033: \noindent Mathematics 253--37 \\

7034: \noindent California Institute of Technology \\

7035: \noindent Pasadena, CA 91125, USA \\

7036: \noindent bsimon@caltech.edu

7037: 

7038: 

7039: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

7040: \endddoc

7041: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

7042: 

7043: %\end{document}

7044: